My joking around about the horse and the temple was just that. As are all portraits in Revelation, the white horse is figurative. I wasn't making a serious theological point,
All "portraits" have an intent. The sword coming out of Christ's mouth, while figurative, represents the enemies of God being destroyed by the Returning Christ with His Word.
While I can fully understand that some will see the horse as figurative as well, what I would ask for, and have already asked for...is the intent of the figurative language.
It is very serious theological point you sought to make, and I can understand that as well. I don't agree with it, but I can understand it. We do not see Satan as a literal Dragon, for example, but we don't dismiss Satan as a literal entity seen throughout Scripture. He is that ancient serpent, and that is the intent of the figurative description.
Christ returning on a white horse has no reason as being seen as figurative, but, if you can give me an intent as we see in regards to the sword coming out of His mouth, then I'll be happy to consider it.
I'd be happy to, lol, can we return to the topic now?
You are the one that will make that determination. And I will abide by whatever decision you make.
I was just humorously show the absurdity of thinking the law is put back into effect when Christ comes again.
I realize that, Aaron, and I can't blame you for having an issue with a view that is in opposition to your own.
But I suggest that is why we get together to discuss these things, to test our own views and those of others.
But once again you present a false argument, because no-one in this thread has suggested that the Law is put back into effect. This issue has to be separated on the basis of what we mean when we speak of the "Law," for we can be referring to the Word of God (the Pentateuch) or the Covenant (of Law).
The former has never lost it's application for Christians, the latter has. Israel engaging in their historical tradition is never rejected, whereas engaging in the Covenant itself is.
And whether the horse described in Revelation 19 is literal or no, that doesn't change the intent of the passage which is to illustrate the Return of Christ, and place it in the Prophetic Timeline of events. He returns, the enemies of God (gathered by God Himself as was prophesied in the Old Testament Prophecy) are destroyed, Satan is bound, the Tribulation Martyrs are resurrected, the Kingdom of God is established for one thousand years, Satan is loosed for a short time (I believe 75 days), the enemies of God are destroyed, Satan is cast into Hell (the Lake of Fire), the current universe passes away, the dead which are not resurrected with the Tribulation Martyrs are raised and judged, the new heavens and earth are created, and the Saints enter into that Eternal (State) Kingdom described in Revelation 21-22.
If one part is in effect, it's all in effect.
We see First Century Christians engaging in Temple services here (and I know this is a lot of Scripture, but read it to see the point...it will take all of about thirty seconds to a minute to do so)...
Acts 21:17-26
King James Version (KJV)
17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
In view is the Word of God, not the Covenant.
Here...
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
...we see it is specifically stated by James and the elders (who are Jews) that they are not saying there is salvific inference being made, but that this is specific to Jews. In other words, they are saying "We have already made it clear that Gentiles are not saved through the observation or performing of the ceremonies of the Law. But in view is the perception of the Jews that Paul was teaching them to forsake that which came before...
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
They are not re-establishing the Covenant of Law, but simply referring to the customs which were specific to Israel. The Jews thought Paul was teaching that it was necessary to separate one's self from those customs altogether, which would be an exaggerated response to Judaism (and the Judaizers) itself.
Paul was not doing that. He was not commanding Jews to forsake their heritage, and we see here that he is willing to partake of a ceremony that involves an offering.
It is like some who despise Mary because of the erroneous teachings of some which deify her. Both positions are erroneous.
That is the case with taking the exaggerated view that Jews must not, or cannot live according to their customs.
And that is precisely what will happen in the Millennial Kingdom. It will not be a reinstatement of the Covenant of Law, but simply a return to the customs which were demanded of God which they never fulfilled in regards to the spiritual prior to Christ's coming. Christ Himself fulfilled the Law.
The offering above was not offered for remission of sins and viewed to be efficacious from an eternal perspective, but simply carried out in accordance with their custom. In view is Paul reassuring Jews that he was teaching that Jews must not live according to tradition and custom, but that Paul was simply teaching Gentiles they did not have to adopt the tradition and custom of the Jew, as was being taught by the Judaizers.
God bless.
