Who Gave the Right to Interpret "Spiritually"?

[Martin Marprelate]

I'll repeat. If all OT prophecies about the first coming of Christ were fulfilled literally (and they were), why shall we not interpret the prophecies of the 2nd Coming literally?

First of all, I most certainly do expect a literal, physical return of Christ in glory.

But let's look at the locusts of Revelation 9:3-10. I read a Dispensational interpretation of these creatures which suggested that they were attack helicopters. Do you regard that as being a literal interpretation? Also, the Grammatical/historical method of interpretation involves asking what the text would have meant to the original readers. Would the 1st or early 2nd Century readers of Revelation have thought to themselves, "Ah! These creatures obviously represent attack helicopters"?

Would those same readers have read Revelation 13:16-17 and thought to themselves, "Ah! these are obviously silicon chip implants" or whatever the current Dispensational interpretation may be?

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

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

Yes. You asked if I expected to see the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost

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

I believe in the deity of Christ, but what does that have to do with anything?

 

[percho]

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



So is Lk 19:12

Is Jesus the Son of God presently also the Son of Man, in heaven, as flesh and bones, incorruptible?

Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

I do not know that I am real sure. How many do you think will be visible?

 

[percho]

Does the Word made flesh look different since ascending to heaven than the Word before being made flesh?

 

[Covenanter]

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 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?

Had you considered what I wrote before replying, you would have read "unjustified allegorical/spiritual interpretation."

Paul's use of allegory is inspired.

But who would have thought the way he equates Jerusalem and the Jews to Hagar and Ishmael was valid?

That is a powerful as Isaiah's denunciation of "the rulers of Sodom." A dreadful metaphor. Very antisemitic! Stephen denounced the Jewish leaders as "uncircumcised."

The spiritual IS the true understanding.

 

[kyredneck]

I believe in the deity of Christ, but what does that have to do with anything?

As concerns the parable, everything.

 

[Van]

It's spring break in the education biz, so I thought I'd cause some mischief.

Every single prophecy of the first coming of Christ, His incarnation, was fulfilled literally. I have a list of over 60 such fulfillments. Think of His being born in Bethlehem, His family fleeing to Egypt, etc.

In the light of that fact, who gave the right to anyone to interpret prophecy about His second coming allegorically or "spiritually"? (These two methods are essentially the same.) Let me be more specific. What has changed between the two comings, or Scripturally, that gives anyone the right to interpret Acts 1:11 any way but literally? And if it is a literal prophecy, then it has not yet been fulfilled. Jesus physcically ascended into Heaven with His resurrection body, so He will physically descend from Heaven with His resurrection body.

There are, of course, many other Scriptures, but this one will do to start.

I did not read the 5 pages of response to this question, I am just addressing the OP.

The answer is God gave the right for us to submit to God's word or under various guises to rewrite it so it fits our fancy.

 

[John of Japan]

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.

So, wait a minute, the belief that I have that allegorical/spiritual interpretation is wrong is now an "accusation"? I beg to differ. It is a heart-felt, Scripture lead, deep conviction of the soul.

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.

I don't understand "interpretation" as "systematic study of Scripture." I see it as simply determining what God actually did say in His Word. That may take seconds, or it may take much study.

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.

True, literal interpretation develops dispensationalism, but it also develops the historic premil position. My grandfather sharply criticized dispensationalism, but was premil, pretrib from his own study, since he believed in literal interpretation.

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.

This cleverly evades the OP, which says that if all prophecy of the first coming of Christ was literal, where does the right come from to "spiritualize" prophecies of the Second Coming. What is your answer? (This post by you is not an answer.)

Now, your position here seems to negate the OT prophecies concerning Israel that are yet unfulfilled. This is a case of reading the NT back into the OT, as CT and NCT do. Here are just a few yet unfulfilled prophecies of Israel from just the major prophets:

Isaiah: The rebuilding of Israel (esp. ch. 26)

Jeremiah: The rebuilding and salvation of Israel (especially ch. 31), Jews regathered from the whole world, Israel in the seven year tribulation period (esp. ch. 30), Israel’s wonderful future (esp. ch. 33)

Ezekiel: The rebuilding and salvation of Israel (ch. 20), the revived kingdom of David (esp. ch. 34), the valley of dry bones, pointing to the restoration of Israel (ch. 37), the New Jerusalem and temple during the Millennium (ch. 40-48)

 

[John of Japan]

First of all, I most certainly do expect a literal, physical return of Christ in glory.

We certainly agree there, but that was not my point. There is far more to a literal interpretation of the 2nd Coming than that.

But let's look at the locusts of Revelation 9:3-10. I read a Dispensational interpretation of these creatures which suggested that they were attack helicopters. Do you regard that as being a literal interpretation? Also, the Grammatical/historical method of interpretation involves asking what the text would have meant to the original readers. Would the 1st or early 2nd Century readers of Revelation have thought to themselves, "Ah! These creatures obviously represent attack helicopters"?

This is completely irrelevant to true dispensationalism and this conversation. Whatever author you read who said that certainly was not a scholar in dispensationalism.

Would those same readers have read Revelation 13:16-17 and thought to themselves, "Ah! these are obviously silicon chip implants" or whatever the current Dispensational interpretation may be?

Again, this is irrelevant to the present discussion. Please go back and read the OP and tell me where the right comes from to interpret any prophecy of the 2nd Coming allegorically, since all prophecies of the 1st Coming were fulfilled literally.

I have even given a Scriptural basis in Neh. 8:8 for literal interpretation. Exactly when, Scripturally (not historically, since that was Philo), did the Jews of the Bible begin interpreting the prophecies concerning their nation allegorically? (It is patently evident from many NT Scriptures that the disciples interpreted future kingdom prophecies literally.)

In other words, this is a straw man argument (no offense).

 

[John of Japan]

Had you considered what I wrote before replying, you would have read "unjustified allegorical/spiritual interpretation."

Paul's use of allegory is inspired.

You are making the typical error of anachronization of the typical allegorizer. The Greek word for "allegory" in Gal. 2 does not mean the same as the word "allegory" in 21st century English. An allegory nowadays is fiction, like Pilgrim's Progress. In Biblical language the meaning was simply "symbolic language."

In the case of the "allegory" in Gal. 2:24, it was a type, a somewhat more complicated metaphor. As Jope pointed out, it was based on an historical event (as are all types), and therefore not the same as modern allegorical interpretation, which takes non-historical Scripture and "spiritualizes" it.

 

[TCassidy]

Whatever author you read who said that certainly was not a scholar in dispensationalism.

Hal Lindsey. The Late, Great Planet Earth.

If that is where Covenanter is getting his information on dispensationalism I can see why he is so confused.

(And this is coming from an historic chiliast who probably agrees with your grand dad more than with you on this subject.)

 

[John of Japan]

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.

So what do you do about the many, many OT prophecies concerning Israel that are not yet fulfilled? (See my post #88 for just a few.) All fulfilled OT prophecies about Israel were fulfilled literally.

This is the whole point of the OP, which this post answers in no way, shape or form. Since 1st Coming prophecies were all fulfilled literally, where do you get the right to interpret prophecies of the 2nd Coming "spiritually"?

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.

"Hyper literally"?? There is no such thing. You either interpret literally or not. When the Bible says, "This same Jesus...shall so come in like manner," either He is coming physically (literal interpretation) or coming (or came already) "spiritually," (allegorizing).

They go with the assembly of living stones as the believers....we are individually spoken of as being the temple of God individually, then...

Again, metaphors which do not answer the OP at all. Why is it that allegorizers on this thread cannot seem to understand what a metaphor is?

Again, please answer the OP. Either literal prophecies of the 2nd Coming will be fulfilled literally, or they will not be fulfilled literally, even though all prophecies of the 1st coming were fulfilled literally. So again, where did you get the right to interpret prophecy allegorically? Don't give me metaphors, give me Scriptural justification for your allegorizing.

 

[John of Japan]

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:

I read your study, and I think it shows a good knowledge of Scripture, and a love for Christ. However, your position on Revelation is the historical view, correct? Therefore, your study shows allegorical interpretation. I believe that view is mistaken, based for one thing on the fact that Revelation's OT parallel is Daniel, and Daniel's prophecies have unfailingly been fulfilled literally. For example, the numbers in Daniel's 70 weeks were literally fulfilled concerning Christ's death. However, you do not interpret the 42 months of Rev. 13:5 literally.

So that brings me again to my OP: where does the right to interpret prophecy allegorically come from, since all OT prophecies of the 1st Coming of Christ were fulfilled literally?

 

[John of Japan]

Hal Lindsey. The Late, Great Planet Earth.

If that is where Covenanter is getting his information on dispensationalism I can see why he is so confused.

Ah, yes, good old Hal. Haven't read him in decades! He certainly is not a dispensational scholar.

(And this is coming from an historic chiliast who probably agrees with your grand dad more than with you on this subject.)

Now there's irony for you! Grandpa was not real pleased when I started hanging with those dispensationalists at BWM.

 

[TCassidy]

Hal Lindsey. The Late, Great Planet Earth.

If that is where Covenanter is getting his information on dispensationalism I can see why he is so confused.

(And this is coming from an historic chiliast who probably agrees with your grand dad more than with you on this subject.)

By the way. Hal Lindsey's rather silly assertion is what happens when you accept an allegorical interpretation.

 

[TCassidy]

John, you and I are going to have to get together in person sometime in the not too distant future.

I will not be attending the ETS annual meeting in Providence, RI this year, but plan on being in Denver for the 2018 meeting (November 13-15).

Any chance you can get a few days off?

We might even coerce Dr. Bob into coming.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

We certainly agree there, but that was not my point. There is far more to a literal interpretation of the 2nd Coming than that.

Well, we agree on the only thing that is vital, and that is good!

This is completely irrelevant to true dispensationalism and this conversation. Whatever author you read who said that certainly was not a scholar in dispensationalism.

Again, this is irrelevant to the present discussion. Please go back and read the OP and tell me where the right comes from to interpret any prophecy of the 2nd Coming allegorically, since all prophecies of the 1st Coming were fulfilled literally.

Well help me out here, John. Give me what you consider to be a literal interpretation of Revelation 9:1-12 and Revelation 13:16-18. How do you interpret these 'literal metaphors' as you call them?

I have even given a Scriptural basis in Neh. 8:8 for literal interpretation. Exactly when, Scripturally (not historically, since that was Philo), did the Jews of the Bible begin interpreting the prophecies concerning their nation allegorically? (It is patently evident from many NT Scriptures that the disciples interpreted future kingdom prophecies literally.)

I have no problem with Nehemiah 8:8. As far as I'm concerned, in my interpretation of Rev.13, I was giving the sense. But the disciples were all over the place with their literal interpretations.
"Beware the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees" "It's because we have no bread."
"I have food to eat that you do not know about" "Has anyone bought Him anything to eat?"
"Where I am going you cannot follow Me, but you shall follow Me afterwards" "Lord, why can't I follow You now?"
Our Lord's language was not allegorical, but it was figurative and spiritual, and that is how we need to interpret Him.

In other words, this is a straw man argument (no offense).

None taken (though it's not a straw man argument)

 

[The Parson]

If you don't mind my asking y'all a question, does anyone here believe that the scriptures say what they mean, and mean what they say? Please, just take a moment however before you answer the question. Just curious...

 

[John of Japan]

Well, we agree on the only thing that is vital, and that is good!

Well help me out here, John. Give me what you consider to be a literal interpretation of Revelation 9:1-12 and Revelation 13:16-18. How do you interpret these 'literal metaphors' as you call them?

I don't believe I've used the term "literal metaphors." And I don't really want to take the time to do an exegesis of Rev. 9, which would distract from the OP. However, 13:16-18 is quite easily taken literally. Why would there be doubt about a simple mark on the right hand or forehead?

I have no problem with Nehemiah 8:8. As far as I'm concerned, in my interpretation of Rev.13, I was giving the sense. But the disciples were all over the place with their literal interpretations.
"Beware the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees" "It's because we have no bread."
"I have food to eat that you do not know about" "Has anyone bought Him anything to eat?"
"Where I am going you cannot follow Me, but you shall follow Me afterwards" "Lord, why can't I follow You now?"

The disciples were like those who interpret allegorically, especially those on the BB who have been posting on this thread. They did not seem to know what a metaphor was, though Jesus used them all the time! Even you, as intelligent as you appear to be, keep making the mistake that says the use of a metaphor means you can interpret allegorically. That's bogus!

Our Lord's language was not allegorical, but it was figurative and spiritual, and that is how we need to interpret Him.

How in the world is "I am the bread of life," a metaphor, somehow more spiritual than "Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature"?? And what gives us the right to interpret passages that are not figures of speech with non-literal meanings?

Here is a list of some figures of speech in the Bible from Paul Lee Tan's excellent book, The Interpretation of Prophecy. They are each easily distinguishable as figures of speech, and none of them indicate that non-figures of speech may be interpreted symbolically:

1. Metaphor. A metaphor uses nouns to compare unlike items (Joel 2:31, Luke 13:32, Is. 41:14).
2. Simile. A comparison: a simile is an expression that uses “like” or “as” to compare two things (Rev. 1:14, 6:12, 16:13).
3. Metonymy. “Use of one name for another related name' (Rev. 11:8).
4. Synecdoche. “Similar to metonymy but physical resemblance is stressed”: “Behold the Lord maketh the earth (Israel) empty" (Is. 24:1).
5. Personification. This gives a human personality to something which has no life (Is. 24:4, 55:12).
6. Apostrophe. “Addressing of an absent object”(1 Cor. 15:55).
7. Hyperbole. Hyperbole is a purposeful exaggeration (John 21:25).
8. Irony. Using words with an opposite meaning to portray sarcasm (1 Kings 18:27).
9. Allegory. “An extended metaphor” (Gal. 4:24).
10. Parable. A parable is an extended metaphor or simile, “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning” (Matt. 13:3, 25:1).
11. Riddle. “Statements designed to puzzle and hide. The Scripture contains a very restrained use of riddles. When a riddle is used, it is often indicated as such (Rev. 13:18 ‘Here is wisdom…666’) or is immediately solved in the context (Samson’s riddle)” (Judges 14:12-18).
12. Fable. “Animals or things in imaginary actions. There are only two fables in Scripture” (Judges 9:7-20, 2 Kings 14:8-11).
13. Type. An institution, event or person in the Old Testament which prefigures New Testament truth. For example, Jonah prefigures Christ (Matt. 12:40).

 

[John of Japan]

John, you and I are going to have to get together in person sometime in the not too distant future.

I will not be attending the ETS annual meeting in Providence, RI this year, but plan on being in Denver for the 2018 meeting (November 13-15).

Any chance you can get a few days off?

We might even coerce Dr. Bob into coming.

I'd love to be there. In the meantime, my son and I are hoping to be at the Bible Faculty Summit again this year: Bible Faculty Summit at Appalachian Bible College August 1–3, 2017

You and Dr. Bob would enjoy it. The guys from Maranatha and Central usually go too.