How Do You Interpret Ezekiel 37?

[asterisktom]

I am not arguing with you that there are not symbols and metaphors used in scripture, that is obvious. But in many cases they are explained in the passage.

You said:



I think a person should always first look for a literal interpretation. And all scripture has spiritual intent.

I didn't call you liberal or disobedient, so I don't know where that came from. I will say this though, many have fallen into error by spiritualizing that which should be taken literally.

I have been debating with some about the six day creation account for example. I take this literal. I believe God knows what a day is compared to billions of years. If God had spent many billions of years creating the universe, he could have said so and I would have believed him. But he says six days, and there is nothing in the passage to indicate they were any different than the 24 hour days we enjoy today. I have no difficulty in believing God could create everything in six days, he could have done it in an instant.

But people take these days and apply long times to them, mostly because they are intimidated by so-called science.

I probably was being a little testy, maybe confusing you with someone else here. Sorry about that.

I do want to know why you see we should always look for a literal interpretation. Do you have a Bible passage that teaches that? I am aware of David L. Cooper's Golden Rule ("If the plain sense...") but not in Scripture itself. I do have verses that argue for seeking a spiritual interpretation first of all. Of course, purely historical books don't need to be examined this way.

 

[Winman]

I probably was being a little testy, maybe confusing you with someone else here. Sorry about that.

I do want to know why you see we should always look for a literal interpretation. Do you have a Bible passage that teaches that? I am aware of David L. Cooper's Golden Rule ("If the plain sense...") but not in Scripture itself. I do have verses that argue for seeking a spiritual interpretation first of all. Of course, purely historical books don't need to be examined this way.

That's alright, I have a way of annoying people. :tongue3:

I don't really follow the teachings of men, never really have. I just believe the Bible was written for us by a loving God who wants us to understand the scriptures. He is not trying to hide things from us. So, in most cases, the scriptures are very straightforward and even easy to understand. Now, books like Daniel, Ezekiel, and Revelations are very difficult. And even Peter said Paul wrote some things hard to understand.

2 Pet 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

Now, if Peter had difficulty with some of Paul's writtings, no doubt we will too. But notice Peter warns to be careful and not led away in error. So we have to be careful how we interpret difficult portions of scripture.

I am not really familiar with what you are putting forward here. Are you saying that the church fulfills Israel to be saved? The temple is not a literal temple?

It seems to me that Paul speaks of Jews who will be saved after the fulness of the Gentiles comes in.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

So, Paul here says Israel is blinded in part (not all were blinded) until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. I have always believed this to apply to Jews who will be saved during the tribulation after the church is taken out at the rapture.

I see Israel in Revelations 12.

Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and the crown of twelve stars is very similar to Joseph's dream. I believe this woman to be Israel.

Gen 37:9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

Joseph would be the twelfth star. These are the twelve tribes of Israel.

The child in Rev 12:2 is Christ.

Rev 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

The man child is Jesus who is now seated on the right hand of God.

Rev 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Lots of folks think Satan was cast out of heaven long ago, I disagree. He still has access to heaven (book of Job). Now, in Revelations 12 when he is cast out, he will persecute Israel and send a flood, which I believe to be a great army. This is what Jesus spoke of to his disciples.

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Notice in Rev 12:16 the earth opens her mouth and swallows the flood.

Zech 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

This I believe describes the earth helping the woman and swallowing the flood sent after her. Notice the mount of Olives will divide in the middle and a great valley will be created through which the Jews will escape this invading army.

Notice also the saints will come with the Lord (vs 5).

Nobody taught me this, I just study. It is difficult, I could be in error, but it does all fit together well.

 

[Robert Snow]

No one has explained why Paul says Eze 37 was fulfilled in the Church according to:


2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Do we just pretend it is not there?

If you want a good article on this subject try this: http://www.eschatology.org/index.ph...ulfilled&catid=43:the-israel-of-god&Itemid=61

I'm still waiting for someone to explain this.

 

[HankD]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain this.

He was speaking to believers in the church age which is distinct from the millennial age and may very well share some/much of the the same or similar principles.

Jesus said this to His apostles concerning the millennial age:

Luke 22

28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.
29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.​

HankD

 

[asterisktom]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain this.

The article was an excellent one, but I doubt that many will look into it, sad to say. One reason is that the author - if he really wants to be accessible to a broad range of readers - needs to break up his paragraphs more, and add headers. I read it with great interest, but most readers - especially those whose theology has been fostered by the more breezy pop-theologians (Hagee, LaChaff, Lindsay, etc.) can't be bothered to really, Bible in hand, squint through fine print (and a very fine marshalling of both Scripture and logic, I might add).

Another reason is the word "Preterist" off to the side. For many that is like skull and cross bones on a bottle - clearly poison. I just know that many are thinking - and I used to do the same, come to think of it - "Now, I know these guys are wrong, so I won't even waste my time reading through all this."

The better approach is just to take a point here and there from articles like that and present them here. One example is the author's showing that 2 Cor. 3-7 is actually a running commentary on the main points of Ezek. 37.

 

[asterisktom]

That's alright, I have a way of annoying people. :tongue3:

I don't really follow the teachings of men, never really have. I just believe the Bible was written for us by a loving God who wants us to understand the scriptures. He is not trying to hide things from us. So, in most cases, the scriptures are very straightforward and even easy to understand. Now, books like Daniel, Ezekiel, and Revelations are very difficult. And even Peter said Paul wrote some things hard to understand.

2 Pet 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

Now, if Peter had difficulty with some of Paul's writtings, no doubt we will too. But notice Peter warns to be careful and not led away in error. So we have to be careful how we interpret difficult portions of scripture.

I am not really familiar with what you are putting forward here. Are you saying that the church fulfills Israel to be saved? The temple is not a literal temple?

It seems to me that Paul speaks of Jews who will be saved after the fulness of the Gentiles comes in.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

So, Paul here says Israel is blinded in part (not all were blinded) until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. I have always believed this to apply to Jews who will be saved during the tribulation after the church is taken out at the rapture.

I see Israel in Revelations 12.

Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and the crown of twelve stars is very similar to Joseph's dream. I believe this woman to be Israel.

Gen 37:9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

Joseph would be the twelfth star. These are the twelve tribes of Israel.

The child in Rev 12:2 is Christ.

Rev 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

The man child is Jesus who is now seated on the right hand of God.

Rev 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Lots of folks think Satan was cast out of heaven long ago, I disagree. He still has access to heaven (book of Job). Now, in Revelations 12 when he is cast out, he will persecute Israel and send a flood, which I believe to be a great army. This is what Jesus spoke of to his disciples.

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Notice in Rev 12:16 the earth opens her mouth and swallows the flood.

Zech 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

This I believe describes the earth helping the woman and swallowing the flood sent after her. Notice the mount of Olives will divide in the middle and a great valley will be created through which the Jews will escape this invading army.

Notice also the saints will come with the Lord (vs 5).

Nobody taught me this, I just study. It is difficult, I could be in error, but it does all fit together well.

I'm sorry, Winman, but, like I said on the other thread, I just don't have the time to get into a point-for-point discussion. Please look at my response on the other thread for more on this. I think the earlier points I raised were never dealt with so I don't want to go all over the map, so to speak, and never really getting down to the core issues.

Core issues:
1. The Bible is mainly about Christ:
The Old Testament points to Christ, His work, the glory of the New Covenant in Christ.
The New Testament builds on that foundation, using imagery from the Old in its exposition.
2. The Old Testament does not offer a door #3 for those Jews who reject Christ and the Gospel. No Millennial system.
3. God does not undo what He did in the New. He didn't rip in half the temple veil - like a giant (and unpayable) IOU - only to return to temple religion in the future.
4. The Seventy Weeks are one unit. They point to Christ - and Christ only.
5. There is no mention of Antichrist in Daniel 9. That is not the focus of that prophecy.

 

[Grasshopper]

He was speaking to believers in the church age which is distinct from the millennial age and may very well share some/much of the the same or similar principles.

Jesus said this to His apostles concerning the millennial age:

Luke 22

28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.
29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.​

HankD

HankD you are a good man, however I must say your answer demonstrates why it is almost impossible to have a discussion with futurists. I show how an inspired NT writer shows the fulfillment of an OT prophetic passage but the futurists comes along as basically says, " yea, Paul quotes it and applies it to the Church Age but we all know its REAL fulfillment is physical and still future."

It's a no-win situation because no matter how many times and how many different OT prophecies are applied by the NT writers, dispies can always claim there is still a future fulfillment of that same passage.

 

[Grasshopper]

The article was an excellent one, but I doubt that many will look into it, sad to say. One reason is that the author - if he really wants to be accessible to a broad range of readers - needs to break up his paragraphs more, and add headers. I read it with great interest, but most readers - especially those whose theology has been fostered by the more breezy pop-theologians (Hagee, LaChaff, Lindsay, etc.) can't be bothered to really, Bible in hand, squint through fine print (and a very fine marshalling of both Scripture and logic, I might add).

Another reason is the word "Preterist" off to the side. For many that is like skull and cross bones on a bottle - clearly poison. I just know that many are thinking - and I used to do the same, come to think of it - "Now, I know these guys are wrong, so I won't even waste my time reading through all this."

The better approach is just to take a point here and there from articles like that and present them here. One example is the author's showing that 2 Cor. 3-7 is actually a running commentary on the main points of Ezek. 37.

If you are not familiar with the author, his books are just like his articles, in-depth and logical. Get his "Who is this Babylon" if you want some fascinating reading.

 

[asterisktom]

If you are not familiar with the author, his books are just like his articles, in-depth and logical. Get his "Who is this Babylon" if you want some fascinating reading.

I have already read some from his website. Good stuff. I appreciate especially how he constantly takes scripture into consideration and how he ties Old Testament together with the New.

 

[Robert Snow]

If you are not familiar with the author, his books are just like his articles, in-depth and logical. Get his "Who is this Babylon" if you want some fascinating reading.

I am leaning toward a partial-preterits viewpoint. I am not completely convinced, but this view seems to better fit the Scripture than the futurist view does.

I was saved at a church that held firmly to the dispensational beliefs and it is sometimes hard to abandon things we learned when first saved. I attend a SBC church and love it in spite of this problem. I just don't bring it up and seldom comment when it is discussed. I find that most people don't even know about any other thing than dispensatiional theology and have no clue about preterism.

 

[Grasshopper]

I am leaning toward a partial-preterits viewpoint. I am not completely convinced, but this view seems to better fit the Scripture than the futurist view does.

I was saved at a church that held firmly to the dispensational beliefs and it is sometimes hard to abandon things we learned when first saved. I attend a SBC church and love it in spite of this problem. I just don't bring it up and seldom comment when it is discussed. I find that most people don't even know about any other thing than dispensatiional theology and have no clue about preterism.

Yep, I thought anything other than what Hal Lindsey taught was heresy. Then I did a funny thing, I studied it for myself and here I am.

 

[HankD]

HankD you are a good man, however I must say your answer demonstrates why it is almost impossible to have a discussion with futurists. I show how an inspired NT writer shows the fulfillment of an OT prophetic passage but the futurists comes along as basically says, " yea, Paul quotes it and applies it to the Church Age but we all know its REAL fulfillment is physical and still future."

It's a no-win situation because no matter how many times and how many different OT prophecies are applied by the NT writers, dispies can always claim there is still a future fulfillment of that same passage.

Thanks, you're a pretty good man yourself grasshopper and one day I may have to admit I was wrong, but yes, for the present, it is probaby impossible to talk me out of a literal millenniel view of this promise Jesus made to His apostles.

Nevertheless, I am open to and actually enjoy discussing the varying views of the brethren concerning "last things" or "past things" or "whatever things".

So, I may have to eat crow... oh wait, crow is an unclean animal and we will probably be vegetarians anyway in the millennium

That was a poor attempt at some humor but I thought I would leave it anyway.

HankD