Spiritual Interpretation....pt6

[Iconoclast]

In part 5 there was little improvement made on the verses in question.
No premillenial person has offered a consistent biblical response to the verses offered dealing with the OT. Usage of the sun, moon, and stars....in Isaiah, and in Joel, and in Acts,and Revelation 6.....the heaven being rolled up like a scroll,stars falling to the earth,the sun not giving light,the moon turning to blood......
No one has answered this from any premill source, as predicted.
The author, his abilities,his Greek knowledge and degrees are being questioned as we speak, but no answer is forthcoming
This thread is about the teaching in those verses.....not the man who gathered them together, or his personal views, but rather an interpretation has been offered and no one has offered anything better so far......maybe this thread will get a fresh response.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Would you accept that it is possible to agree that these phenomena are not to be interpreted strictly literally, and yet still not see that there is any reason to ascribe them to AD 70?

 

[Covenanter]

Would you accept that it is possible to agree that these phenomena are not to be interpreted strictly literally, and yet still not see that there is any reason to ascribe them to AD 70?

I think there is no way all the phenomena can be understood literally, & I don't think it possible even to say that "this prophesied phenomenon corresponds to this historical event."

We have to consider what the overall event is that is prophesied. We understand from the OT prophecies that a real fulfilment did occur with such events as the Babylonish invasion & 70 year captivity. We can therefore look for a real event such as the AD 70 destruction which occurred as prophesied by the Lord Jesus.

We see in Revelation prophecies, warnings, judgments & protection & deliverance of believers. These occurred. We can keep the book open & see the fall of the Roman empire, the rise of the RCC, the rise & conquest of Islam & events down the ages & near our own times. We need to keep our ears open & take to heart what we read.

 

[Iconoclast]

Would you accept that it is possible to agree that these phenomena are not to be interpreted strictly literally, and yet still not see that there is any reason to ascribe them to AD 70?

Sure....but I want to see a biblical case for it.
I do not have my four views of revelation book with me at this time to see each deal with rev.6:12-17...
Martin....I am concerned to come to truth....I am okay with any teaching that helps come to truth.
What good would it be for me to be postmill....if historic premillennialism was the ticket?
Why be dispensational, if Covenant Amillennial teaching was correct?
Currently I am attempting to live as if the postmillennial position is correct....Amillennial brothers are close in understanding. ...historic premillennialism third place,Dispensational premillennialism 4th place.
This is the findings of a recent poll....lol.
I do not see how people get around this language dealing with the light bearers being changed.
This language translates to a literal meaning that Dr oes not reference heavenly bodies....and it's usage is consistent.

 

[Iconoclast]

I think there is no way all the phenomena can be understood literally, & I don't think it possible even to say that "this prophesied phenomenon corresponds to this historical event."

We have to consider what the overall event is that is prophesied. We understand from the OT prophecies that a real fulfilment did occur with such events as the Babylonish invasion & 70 year captivity. We can therefore look for a real event such as the AD 70 destruction which occurred as prophesied by the Lord Jesus.

We see in Revelation prophecies, warnings, judgments & protection & deliverance of believers. These occurred. We can keep the book open & see the fall of the Roman empire, the rise of the RCC, the rise & conquest of Islam & events down the ages & near our own times. We need to keep our ears open & take to heart what we read.

Chilton sought to "fit" the symbols to events in the first century ,using the bible to interpret itself.
Most others, even the reformers sought to ascribe it to their time period.
No one says Chilton had it all right ...but he made a good attempt to use the whole bible to find the answers from scripture.
Let's say it got it 68% right.....we could work on the rest of it using some ideas as a base to start with.
He had.physical problems, leading to a stroke, coma....brain impairment and eventually a heart attack...so ..he is not here to answer for himself. Neither is Spurgeon, or Owen, or Pink, or Dagg,etc....so...I want to address the verses in question .
Some examination of the "source" is warranted. That should not be used to avoid the issue.
In this last episode..."Professor Kyredneck"....offered a summary of the time texts that he and others want to see dealt with. The first thing I look at is how the other views handle the time texts, then the symbols.
What I found helpful in this book and other postmill works is they are looking for Jesus, not the antichrist, they are looking at the spread of the gospel, not the 10 nation confederacy and the little horn.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I think there is no way all the phenomena can be understood literally, & I don't think it possible even to say that "this prophesied phenomenon corresponds to this historical event."

I agree up to a point, but this does not give us open season to make up any weird explanation we may feel like and say, "this is my spiritual interpretation." This chap Chilton says that Revelation is the most 'biblical' book in the Bible inasmuch as there are references to various O.T. books throughout. In this, at least, he is in agreement with most other commentators that I've read. So we need to compare Scripture with Scripture to come to our understanding.

We have to consider what the overall event is that is prophesied. We understand from the OT prophecies that a real fulfilment did occur with such events as the Babylonish invasion & 70 year captivity. We can therefore look for a real event such as the AD 70 destruction which occurred as prophesied by the Lord Jesus.

We can, and without a doubt Matthew 24:2 is a prediction of AD 70, and IMO Matthew 24:32-35 is as well, and some of the bits in between, but not all. But when you come to Matthew 24:36-51, you're looking at something quite different. Before AD 70, there will be signs and the approximate time is known. Verse 36 speaks of a time that no one knows and that will be sudden and without warning (v.44; 1 Thessalonians 5:2-6 etc.).

We see in Revelation prophecies, warnings, judgments & protection & deliverance of believers. These occurred. We can keep the book open & see the fall of the Roman empire, the rise of the RCC, the rise & conquest of Islam & events down the ages & near our own times. We need to keep our ears open & take to heart what we read.

We must be careful not to read in things that we think ought to be there. What we can be sure of is the Gospel being preached throughout the world (Matthew 24:14; Revelation 6:2) and tribulation and persecution (Matthew 24:4-13; Revelation 6:3-11;13:6-10, 15-16 etc.). All this going on constantly until the Lord's Return in glory.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Sure....but I want to see a biblical case for it.
I do not have my four views of revelation book with me at this time to see each deal with rev.6:12-17...

I've hardly started my reading of Chilton's book yet, but I cannot see Revelation 6:12-17 as referring to AD 70. I cannot think of anywhere where the phrase 'Kings of the earth' means the rulers of Israel or Jerusalem. In Psalm 2:2, they are the Gentiles (v.1) and enemies of God. Psalm 89:27 refers to the Messiah as higher than the kings of the earth. Verse 15 simply refers to all of unsaved humanity cowering at the return of Christ. There is no attempt to localize it in any way. A greater event than the destruction of Jerusalem is being spoken of here. On that day no one will be able to hide from the presence of the one seated on the throne (Psalm 139:7-12). In AD 70, the folk in Corinth or Thessalonika would have been going about their business blissfully unaware of what was going on in Jerusalem, nor would they have been affected by it.

 

[Iconoclast]

I've hardly started my reading of Chilton's book yet, but I cannot see Revelation 6:12-17 as referring to AD 70. I cannot think of anywhere where the phrase 'Kings of the earth' means the rulers of Israel or Jerusalem. In Psalm 2:2, they are the Gentiles (v.1) and enemies of God. Psalm 89:27 refers to the Messiah as higher than the kings of the earth. Verse 15 simply refers to all of unsaved humanity cowering at the return of Christ. There is no attempt to localize it in any way. A greater event than the destruction of Jerusalem is being spoken of here. On that day no one will be able to hide from the presence of the one seated on the throne (Psalm 139:7-12). In AD 70, the folk in Corinth or Thessalonika would have been going about their business blissfully unaware of what was going on in Jerusalem, nor would they have been affected by it.

let me know what you think of this....
POSTMILLENNIALISM:

 

[Iconoclast]

I've hardly started my reading of Chilton's book yet, but I cannot see Revelation 6:12-17 as referring to AD 70. I cannot think of anywhere where the phrase 'Kings of the earth' means the rulers of Israel or Jerusalem. In Psalm 2:2, they are the Gentiles (v.1) and enemies of God. Psalm 89:27 refers to the Messiah as higher than the kings of the earth. Verse 15 simply refers to all of unsaved humanity cowering at the return of Christ. There is no attempt to localize it in any way. A greater event than the destruction of Jerusalem is being spoken of here. On that day no one will be able to hide from the presence of the one seated on the throne (Psalm 139:7-12). In AD 70, the folk in Corinth or Thessalonika would have been going about their business blissfully unaware of what was going on in Jerusalem, nor would they have been affected by it.

Tonight on preceptaustin I found this...a premill trying hard to hold onto a literal meaning to rev.6...

.6.14 - Revelation 6:14 ἀπεχωρίσθη [apechōristhē] . The term is used to describe the parting of Paul and Silas from Barnabas and Mark (Acts 15:39). The sky receded causing it to be “split apart” (NASB). At the appearance of the Judge at the 20:11+). The psalmist predicted a time when the heavens would “grow old like a 102:25).

Come near, you 34:1-4) [emphasis added]

Passages such as this tempt the interpreter to jettison the 96 Yet events which are so far removed from our daily experience as to be completely foreign need not be incredible when initiated by the 20:11+; . . . The impression of all these heavenly phenomena is that the universe is coming apart.”97


In response to these events, men recognize the 6:16+). Mills offers an unusual suggestion concerning the 6:16+). Revelation 6:14+ pictures an extended scroll suddenly being split; the two ends recoil, spring-like, around the end 7:56. 98

 

[John of Japan]

In part 5 there was little improvement made on the verses in question.
No premillenial person has offered a consistent biblical response to the verses offered dealing with the OT. Usage of the sun, moon, and stars....in Isaiah, and in Joel, and in Acts,and Revelation 6.....the heaven being rolled up like a scroll,stars falling to the earth,the sun not giving light,the moon turning to blood......
.

This is baloney. You know I answered this, to my satisfaction if not to yours. Frankly, the non-literalists have more trouble with such passages than I do.

And yet here you are again. Don't you think you've overworked the theme? How about if you go back and answer what my thread (the first one in the series) was about, namely, if all the first advent prophecies were literally fulfilled, why would 2nd coming prophecies not be literally fulfilled? (For the record, Chilton never answered this or even dealt with it. Frankly, I think it's not answerable, which is why "spiritualizers" here on the BB keep avoiding it.)

 

[Covenanter]

This is baloney. You know I answered this, to my satisfaction if not to yours. Frankly, the non-literalists have more trouble with such passages than I do.

And yet here you are again. Don't you think you've overworked the theme? How about if you go back and answer what my thread (the first one in the series) was about, namely, if all the first advent prophecies were literally fulfilled, why would 2nd coming prophecies not be literally fulfilled? (For the record, Chilton never answered this or even dealt with it. Frankly, I think it's not answerable, which is why "spiritualizers" here on the BB keep avoiding it.)

Please list 2 or 3 second coming prophecies you would like comments on.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

let me know what you think of this....
POSTMILLENNIALISM:

Thanks for posting this, Icon. Very interesting!
I don't think I've read anything by Kenneth Gentry before, but he is quite well-know and well thought-of. I offer a few observations:

First of all, all eschatology is ultimately optimistic; no one actually believes that Satan wins. There is a commentary on Revelation (I forget by whom) called 'The Lamb Wins!' It is from an Amil perspective. So I don't accept the term 'Eschatology of Despair.' However, there is within Amillennialism a Pessimistic viewpoint and an Optimistic viewpoint. I will come to those later.

Two small areas of disagreement: Gentry mentions the 'Dominion Mandate' (Genesis 1:26). That is no problem. Man is given dominion over so many aspects of the world. His problem is that since the Fall he has no dominion over himself, so that Gen. 6, God is contemplating his destruction. Gentry also describes all the covenants as 'covenants of promise.' I disagree. It is the Noahic, Abrahamic and Davidic covenants that are these. The Sinaitic covenant is conditional as are the covenant of works (dependant on Adam) and the covenant of grace (dependant on Christ).

Gentry gives several texts showing optimistic predictions, but he and you will know that there are just as many showing less happy outcomes. And this of course this is where Preterism comes in. If you can shovel all the unsatisfactory texts into AD 70 and leave them there and forget about them, you can enjoy your Postmillennialism without a qualm. However, I don't think this is honest.

I do agree with Gentry that the Last days, and indeed the Kingdom of God, begin with Christ. At the cross, Satan is bound; at Pentecost, the Spirit is poured out. However, the fact is that the Gospel goes out against a dark background.

I want to look at Revelation 6, where the Lamb opens the seals of the scroll. The scroll represents the decree of God for the period between the first and second comings of our Lord. Now here, in verse 2, we see the difference between optimistic and pessimistic amillennialism. Who is the Rider on the white horse? IMO, it is Jesus Christ, and all through the age He is riding out as a conqueror, sacking the borders of hell, taking the goods of the strong man (Matthew 12:29), building His Church (Matthew 16:18).

But these things happen against a sombre background. We see war, scarcity and inequality, disease and death, and a steady flow of martyrs throughout all this time (vs. 3-11). And of course this is exactly what we see in the world all down the years; the Gospel going into all the world, but experiencing defeats here and there and people dying for the sake of Christ. while the love of many grows cold.

The sixth seal (vs.12-17) is the Return of Christ. I cannot see this as a local event. Yes, the language is poetic and figurative but it is also universal; every mountain and every island is moved out of place. Judgement is coming on all the world. The seventh seal (8:1) is Judgement.

I hope that gives some food for thought. Let me know what you think. If you want more detail, see my blog post Revelation (3). Chapter 6: The Seven seals

 

[Iconoclast]

Thanks for posting this, Icon. Very interesting!
I don't think I've read anything by Kenneth Gentry before, but he is quite well-know and well thought-of. I offer a few observations:

First of all, all eschatology is ultimately optimistic; no one actually believes that Satan wins. There is a commentary on Revelation (I forget by whom) called 'The Lamb Wins!' It is from an Amil perspective. So I don't accept the term 'Eschatology of Despair.' However, there is within Amillennialism a Pessimistic viewpoint and an Optimistic viewpoint. I will come to those later.

Two small areas of disagreement: Gentry mentions the 'Dominion Mandate' (Genesis 1:26). That is no problem. Man is given dominion over so many aspects of the world. His problem is that since the Fall he has no dominion over himself, so that Gen. 6, God is contemplating his destruction. Gentry also describes all the covenants as 'covenants of promise.' I disagree. It is the Noahic, Abrahamic and Davidic covenants that are these. The Sinaitic covenant is conditional as are the covenant of works (dependant on Adam) and the covenant of grace (dependant on Christ).

Gentry gives several texts showing optimistic predictions, but he and you will know that there are just as many showing less happy outcomes. And this of course this is where Preterism comes in. If you can shovel all the unsatisfactory texts into AD 70 and leave them there and forget about them, you can enjoy your Postmillennialism without a qualm. However, I don't think this is honest.

I do agree with Gentry that the Last days, and indeed the Kingdom of God, begin with Christ. At the cross, Satan is bound; at Pentecost, the Spirit is poured out. However, the fact is that the Gospel goes out against a dark background.

I want to look at Revelation 6, where the Lamb opens the seals of the scroll. The scroll represents the decree of God for the period between the first and second comings of our Lord. Now here, in verse 2, we see the difference between optimistic and pessimistic amillennialism. Who is the Rider on the white horse? IMO, it is Jesus Christ, and all through the age He is riding out as a conqueror, sacking the borders of hell, taking the goods of the strong man (Matthew 12:29), building His Church (Matthew 16:18).

But these things happen against a sombre background. We see war, scarcity and inequality, disease and death, and a steady flow of martyrs throughout all this time (vs. 3-11). And of course this is exactly what we see in the world all down the years; the Gospel going into all the world, but experiencing defeats here and there and people dying for the sake of Christ. while the love of many grows cold.

The sixth seal (vs.12-17) is the Return of Christ. I cannot see this as a local event. Yes, the language is poetic and figurative but it is also universal; every mountain and every island is moved out of place. Judgement is coming on all the world. The seventh seal (8:1) is Judgement.

I hope that gives some food for thought. Let me know what you think. If you want more detail, see my blog post Revelation (3). Chapter 6: The Seven seals

I will look over your blog in a bit. I see postmill and amill{optimistic ones as very similar....
Some Amill like David Englesma think postmill is dangerous.

Martin....what I see with Amill is....it does not try to get specific as postmill does.
In other words....how does our view of eschatology affect our lives now.
How does our view of the kingdom impact us everyday.

Because the postmill seek implementation of Kingdom living now, they attract these other groups....reconstruction men, theonomy guys, Dominion theology....
There is some things in common, and some go way off in reference to how to implement biblical law...either OT./ or NT.

That is what I look for....I get the basic Amill position, but where do they indicate where we should be implementing these things.

 

[Iconoclast]

John of Japan,

This is baloney. You know I answered this, to my satisfaction if not to yours. Frankly, the non-literalists have more trouble with such passages than I do.

John...yes you offered a brief response, however it really did not provide a satisfactory answer.
Let me demonstrate.
The main gist of your response was...the word for stars, could also be meteor....it could, but it could also mean stars as in light givers like our SUN.

When this language is employed by Joseph in His dream sequences...lets see;
6 And he said unto them, Hear, I pray you, this dream which I have dreamed:

7 For, behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sheaf.

8 And his brethren said to him, Shalt thou indeed reign over us? or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us? And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words.

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.

The language of the dreams had to do with His REIGN over them.
He does not say, by the way......sun moon and meteors....he says stars, light givers...

And yet here you are again. Don't you think you've overworked the theme?

No. I do not think it is over worked. I think it is over looked.
I and others see a link in the language...a Divinely given template in order that we could properly understand the events of Pentecost as God intended them to be understood.

Other than having a history lesson on the destruction of Babylon, or Idumea, premill persons would skip over these verses as if they are useless,
I will show this using that man who opposed Gentry on Precept Austin...

If you noticed his commentary on revelation 6:12-17...he is suggesting the end of the world, or some kind of supernatural opening and closing of the sky by God???
He mentions a few of these OT verses ,so he knows they are there , but he cannot or will not connect the dots.
At one point he says....one could be tempted to "spiritualize the passage"...lol.....he should have tried to it would have helped him.
I have not seen a premill commentary deal with this language which is central to understand the olivet discourse, as well as Joel, the day of Pentecost, the end of the jewish age, or theocracy..

How about if you go back and answer what my thread (the first one in the series) was about, namely, if all the first advent prophecies were literally fulfilled

I agree that many verses were literally fulfilled. I think there is a reason for that. the reason being that The King was coming to Zion and Jerusalem...he was taking Zion and Jerusalem...as David did in 2sam 5:7...
Then He taught the Spiritual realities of the Kingdom reign....MT 5 -7 is for us...the whole OT is for us...it speaks of Jesus;

You said in a one sentence response Isa 60-66 is written for Jews...I say while they were given the oracles of God...it is written for all the people of God;
11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.


27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

, why would 2nd coming prophecies not be literally fulfilled?

They will be literally fulfilled

(For the record, Chilton never answered this or even dealt with it. Frankly, I think it's not answerable, which is why "spiritualizers" here on the BB keep avoiding it.)

It is dealt with in this way....His attempt is to show the book was written to comfort those in the first century under going persecution, and inform them that Jesus indeed was on the throne.

 

[Iconoclast]

Here3.6.14 - Revelation 6:14 ἀπεχωρίσθη [apechōristhē] . The term is used to describe the parting of Paul and Silas from Barnabas and Mark (Acts 15:39). The sky receded causing it to be “split apart” (NASB). At the appearance of the Judge at the 20:11+). The psalmist predicted a time when the heavens would “grow old like a 102:25).
Come near, you 34:1-4) [emphasis added]

Passages such as this tempt the interpreter to jettison the literal approach and go symbolic"
Yet events which are so far removed from our daily experience as to be completely foreign need not be incredible when initiated by the 20:11+; . . .

The impression of all these heavenly phenomena is that the universe is coming apart.”

He is trying to hold onto the literal.....No one says the universe is coming apart in isa 13, or 34..... that is what I want to see specifically addressed

You can do it, or you can offer links where anyone has done it.
I have not said Chilton himself is not refutable, I have said I have not seen ONE premill commentator be consistent with this language in each verse dealing with sun, moon , and stars, in a way that refutes Chilton., Gentry, or any other partial preterist.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Martin....what I see with Amill is....it does not try to get specific as postmill does.
In other words....how does our view of eschatology affect our lives now.
How does our view of the kingdom impact us everyday.

What I see is this:
First of all I must live in the light of Christ's imminent return. 'Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming' (Matt. 24:42). 'And you yourselves be like men who wait for their master.....that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes will find watching' (Luke 12:36-37). I think there is a danger in believing that the Lord cannot come until certain conditions have been met. We need to be working while it is day, bringing the Gospel before the lost while there is time. As well as my duties as an elder in my church, I am involved with door-to-door evangelism and with Gideons International, bringing the word of God before the people in the 'traffic lanes of life.'.
Secondly, if it is not too disrespectful, I like to think of God as keeping a diary or calendar. There is a date ringed round and marked with the words, "Return of Christ. End of Age," But is it not possible that there is another, earlier date marked, "Send revival on Britain and the USA"? When we pray, "Your kingdom come," we may have in our mind the Return of Christ, but also that God's kingdom, which is already in the world (Luke 17:20-21) will be manifested in greater power (Isaiah 64:1-5).

So briefly, Amils neither think that the world can only get worse and worse until Christ returns, nor that many years must pass before He does so. They believe that now is the time to work, for who knows what God may do in these last days?

 

[John of Japan]

John of Japan,

John...yes you offered a brief response, however it really did not provide a satisfactory answer.

Then don't say again that no one answered you.

Let me demonstrate.
The main gist of your response was...the word for stars, could also be meteor....it could, but it could also mean stars as in light givers like our SUN.

I say this as an encouragement for you to study further: in these threads you have been essentially negative. Your goal seems to be to tear down literal interpretation rather than present positive things about your own scheme of interpretation.

Now, all Scripture is "profitable" (2 Tim. 3:16-17), and we are to live by "every word" of Scripture (Matt. 4:4). So, please interpret Acts 2 yourself; I don't remember you doing this yet, but only challenging literal interpreters to do so. So, how were these words and phrases from Acts 2 fulfilled in your scheme:

"blood"
"and fire,"
"and vapour of smoke:"
"The sun shall be turned into darkness"
"and the moon into blood"

When this language is employed by Joseph in His dream sequences...lets see;
6 And he said unto them, Hear, I pray you, this dream which I have dreamed:

7 For, behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sheaf.

8 And his brethren said to him, Shalt thou indeed reign over us? or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us? And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words.

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.

The language of the dreams had to do with His REIGN over them.
He does not say, by the way......sun moon and meteors....he says stars, light givers...

This is all irrelevant to me. Joseph's dreams were interpreted by the Lord Himself in the text of Scripture.

No. I do not think it is over worked. I think it is over looked.
I and others see a link in the language...a Divinely given template in order that we could properly understand the events of Pentecost as God intended them to be understood.

Great. Then stop criticizing literal interpretation and interpret the Joel 2 prophecy for us.

Other than having a history lesson on the destruction of Babylon, or Idumea, premill persons would skip over these verses as if they are useless,

I never, ever skip over Scripture.

I will show this using that man who opposed Gentry on Precept Austin...

If you noticed his commentary on revelation 6:12-17...he is suggesting the end of the world, or some kind of supernatural opening and closing of the sky by God???
He mentions a few of these OT verses ,so he knows they are there , but he cannot or will not connect the dots.
At one point he says....one could be tempted to "spiritualize the passage"...lol.....he should have tried to it would have helped him.
I have not seen a premill commentary deal with this language which is central to understand the olivet discourse, as well as Joel, the day of Pentecost, the end of the jewish age, or theocracy..

I'm not really interested in this guy's commentary. And your comments, once again, are negative and not positive.

I agree that many verses were literally fulfilled. I think there is a reason for that. the reason being that The King was coming to Zion and I...he was taking Zion and Jerusalem...as David did in 2sam 5:7...

Not just many, but all prophecies of the incarnation were literally fulfilled.

Then He taught the Spiritual realities of the Kingdom reign....MT 5 -7 is for us...the whole OT is for us...it speaks of Jesus;

I agree absolutely.

You said in a one sentence response Isa 60-66 is written for Jews...I say while they were given the oracles of God...it is written for all the people of God;

And your positive point is?

11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Absolutely.

27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

And He showed them the literal fulfillment of those prophecies.

They will be literally fulfilled

Great! Then Christ will literally reign on earth for 1000 years!

It is dealt with in this way....His attempt is to show the book was written to comfort those in the first century under going persecution, and inform them that Jesus indeed was on the throne.

So again, Chilton interpreted Revelation "spiritually." Let me ask, do you agree with his hermeneutics, specifically his "interpretive maximalism"?

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

Would you accept that it is possible to agree that these phenomena are not to be interpreted strictly literally, and yet still not see that there is any reason to ascribe them to AD 70?

That is precisely what I conceded, and then after you concede that, there is no response to the many reasons I gave that they do not apply to A.D. 70.

 

[Iconoclast]

This thread is about spiritual interpretation ,the series of threads has been about that. It's going to sound negative because the premillennial position speaks against it and wants to ridicule those who look for any spiritual interpretation as allegorizing and spiritualizing away the text.
Another example of this kind of understanding the scripture would come from the term thorns and Briars. Thorns and Briars are used in scripture to speak of apostates period so when we come to Hebrew 6 it helps understand the passage the Old Testament usage of thorns and Briars in Ezekiel and Jeremiah ,Isaiah has to do with apostates.
If God uses the language of sun moon and stars which were the timekeepers and like givers and saying that they're not going to do what they were created to do that is give their light and it's going to be changes and then we see that every time that the phrases are used together it is used of a change of government or Administration then it helps us to understand Matthew 24 and Acts 2 when it when Peter quotes from Joel using the same language.
Premillennial people will make reference to symbols or metaphors or figurative language but almost to dismiss the passage not to understand it and I don't see any premillennial person able to integrate all these sections of scripture together.
If you have a link that shows any commentary you are premillennial person who mentions the verses and shows how they linked together I'll be more than willing to look at it I just don't know of it and haven't seen it.

In post 8 I gave a helpful link to Ken Gentry who outlines the position that some of us are looking at in a very clear fashion.
I don't see anything to pick on in his outline. It shows that it is a very positive view, a Biblical View of the victorious spread of the gospel.
That being said....the thread is not about me or what I think but rather these verses are on the table.....some see a link to the biblical usage here that changes the whole framework of eschatology.
Some support this position....some do not. We welcome anything that furthers the discussion.
You have shown that David Chilton might not have been the most proficient in using and understanding the Greek language. That is a helpful caution.
It does not seem to impact the basic premise of the position so far.
It looks as if it has not changed it yet.
Was there anything said to change mt 24, Joel 2, Acts2 isa13,isa34,rev6?

 

[John of Japan]

This thread is about spiritual interpretation ,the series of threads has been about that. It's going to sound negative because the premillennial position speaks against it and wants to ridicule those who look for any spiritual interpretation as allegorizing and spiritualizing away the text.

Would you care to show where I have ridiculed anything? I could ridicule Philo (a Jew) and Origen (a "Christian" with bizarre teachings) for their insertion of spiritualizing into Christianity, but I don't recall ridiculing that position here on the BB.

Premillennial people will make reference to symbols or metaphors or figurative language but almost to dismiss the passage not to understand it and I don't see any premillennial person able to integrate all these sections of scripture together.

This is a false charge. I have not dismissed any passage.

If you have a link that shows any commentary you are premillennial person who mentions the verses and shows how they linked together I'll be more than willing to look at it I just don't know of it and haven't seen it.

According to Jesus in Matt. 4:4, every word is important. I have asked you to interpret the individual words and phrases of Joel 2 as quoted by Peter in Acts 2. Can you do that?

In post 8 I gave a helpful link to Ken Gentry who outlines the position that some of us are looking at in a very clear fashion.
I don't see anything to pick on in his outline. It shows that it is a very positive view, a Biblical View of the victorious spread of the gospel.
That being said....the thread is not about me or what I think but rather these verses are on the table.....some see a link to the biblical usage here that changes the whole framework of eschatology.

The thread is not about you, even though you started it, because you keep putting other people and their opinions up here. Surely you have your own position and can defend it without Chilton, Gentry (who I was in college with), et al.

You have shown that David Chilton might not have been the most proficient in using and understanding the Greek language. That is a helpful caution.

"Not the most proficient" in Greek? That's a huge understatement. Anyway, glad to see you understand that somewhat. Sorry you still think him and his fake degrees to be relevant.

It does not seem to impact the basic premise of the position so far.

I think it does. Wait until next week when I discuss Chilton's awful hermeneutics.