How can we be confident in our theories about the Book of Revelation?

A New World said:

Thanks for sharing your opinion of what "that sounds like" to you. All we have is what is recorded in Scripture. You may believe the language is describing literal events but, were you there?

Click to expand...

.
The Bible is literal unless the text states otherwise or the context makes it clear. Unfortunately there are a lot of different groups imagining figurative language which, surprise, surprise, just happens to support their assumptions/presuppositions as in the instant case. I wonder if I should believe that the stick of Joseph in Eze 37:19 refers to the founder of a certain 19th century UT group and the book from which the group takes its name? LDS, JW, WWCG, UU, OP, UPCI, INC, SDA, so many groups to choose from and so much different theoretical figurative language..

Could be I guess. But, as I read the text itself I find:.
The reason for the prophecy
Isaiah 13:1 "The burden against Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw."

Click to expand...

.
And your point is? I agree that God revealed a prophecy to Isaiah..

The details of the prophecy which included cosmic language
Isaiah 13:1-16

Click to expand...

.
In your opinion cosmic language..

The nation God would use to carry out His judgment
Isaiah 13:17 "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them..."

Click to expand...

.
Once again what is your point? This proves nothing about any so-called "cosmic language.".

This leads me to the logical conclusion that God followed a similar pattern evident in other prophecies. Cosmic language describing judgment, and in this case the transfer of power from one kingdom to another.

Click to expand...

.
If you assume that the signs were merely "cosmic language" and assume that neither the Egyptians nor the Babylonians actually saw the signs..

No, we were not there. No modern interpreter knows what the Egyptians did/did not see. We can compare Scripture with Scripture and know that God appearing to man in a cloud has symbolized judgment. It would be foolish for anyone to deny the use of this type of figurative language in Scripture.

Click to expand...

.
Let's compare scripture with scripture. The first seven times God appears in a cloud in the OT; Exo 16:10, Exo 19:9, Exo 34:5, Lev 6:2, Num 11:25, Num 12:5, Deu 31:15. None of them symbolize judgment. Isaiah 19:1 is the eighth occurrence..

We know Egypt experienced God's judgment. But, we also know the cup from which the Egyptians drank was not a literal cup, and human hearts didn't literally melt.

Click to expand...

.
I can't find anything about a cup in Isa 13 or 19. "heart melting in fear" is a common expression in the OT. It occurs at least eleven times. That does not justify finding other figures of speech..

It's doesn't seem to be that difficult to understand that the use of cosmic language that appears to some to be literal is actually describing the end of a kingdom or empire.

Click to expand...

There you go, still assuming "cosmic language" again.

Der Alter said:

.
The Bible is literal unless the text states otherwise or the context makes it clear.

Click to expand...

Again, the context of Isaiah 13 seems clear. Unless one is determined to ignore it due to preconceived ideas or a personal agenda. The straightforward reading of the text according to the prophet is God's judgment of Babylon.

Isaiah 13 contains language that seems to be non-controversial with the possible exception of two verses- ten and thirteen.

We know the prophecy was given from Israel's prophet. It was written to inform Israel of the impending judgment from God on her enemy. It was about the Medes coming to Babylon and carrying out God's judgment. The Babylonian kingdom would come to an end at that time. From a kingdom perspective, she was replaced and never heard from again.

My question is, what is the motivation for extracting two prophetic verses relating to judgment out of the original context?

We know the judgment of Babylon occurred. Her kingdom came to an abrupt end. She was Daniel's first kingdom and she was replaced by his second kingdom, Medo-Persia.

Unfortunately there are a lot of different groups imagining figurative language which, surprise, surprise, just happens to support their assumptions/presuppositions as in the instant case. I wonder if I should believe that the stick of Joseph in Eze 37:19 refers to the founder of a certain 19th century UT group and the book from which the group takes its name? LDS, JW, WWCG, UU, OP, UPCI, INC, SDA, so many groups to choose from and so much different theoretical figurative language..

Click to expand...

I agree with you. Far too many people have been deceived by the misuse of the figurative language and other misinterpretations of Scripture.

I'm suspicious of the "KJV only" crowd because some of those who claim to be teachers misuse the old English language to deceive their followers. I guess anyone who claims superior knowledge of any language could use that to deceive and manipulate their uninformed, unsuspecting followers.

But, to my knowledge, none of them have taken two verses from Isaiah 13 out of the original context to deny the historical fulfillment of God's judgment on Babylon in support of their misguided agendas.

And your point is? I agree that God revealed a prophecy to Isaiah..

Click to expand...

My point is, Isaiah's prophecy of imminent destruction of the Babylonian kingdom was fulfilled.

In your opinion cosmic language..

Click to expand...

No, the context and the historical fact that there was a transfer of kingdoms demands that Isaiah employed figurative language.

If you assume that the signs were merely "cosmic language" and assume that neither the Egyptians nor the Babylonians actually saw the signs..

Click to expand...

Isaiah gave the prophecy to Israel. When the event occurred they would have recognized the fulfillment. There's no reason to think they missed the fall of Babylon and the establishment of the Medo-Persian empire.

I can't find anything about a cup in Isa 13 or 19.

Click to expand...

According to your quote, you will find it in Isaiah 19.

Below is what you provided previously:

Here is Isaiah 19:1 in the Targum Isaiah.

Ripheus27 said:

I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

Click to expand...

No man would know the objective truth of the things in the Bible aside from Jesus

Everybody else is just grasping at straws

interpreter said:

Jesus now rules the earth through the US...

Click to expand...

If Jesus rules the Earth from the US, then I've officially lost faith in Him. Keep in mind that this is an American saying this.

interpreter said:

Jesus now rules the earth through the US

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? This country(and I'm an American by the way)has gone down hill. It's immorally corrupted and has lost it's way from God so no Jesus is not ruling through this country.

Isaacsname said:

No man would know the objective truth of the things in the Bible aside from Jesus

Everybody else is just grasping at straws

Click to expand...

Actually the Bible teaches that the Son came to reveal truth to men.

Matthew 11:27 "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."

Acts 26:16 'But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you.'

Romans 16:25,26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith--

James Is Back said:

Are you kidding me? This country(and I'm an American by the way)has gone down hill. It's immorally corrupted and has lost it's way from God so no Jesus is not ruling through this country.

Click to expand...

agreed.

ananda said:

Isn't the book of Revelation one of the weakest supported books in the Bible?

Click to expand...

It is a book that can only be understood in the light of everything else (Biblically speaking) written before it, so in that respect I wouldn't say that it is weakly supported, more weakly understood because of a lack of understanding about the rest.

A New World said:

Actually the Bible teaches that the Son came to reveal truth to men.

Matthew 11:27 "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."

Acts 26:16 'But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you.'

Romans 16:25,26 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith--

Click to expand...

There is no " actually "

Jesus Christ would be the authority on the written word, that's really all there is to it

Isaacsname said:

There is no " actually "

Jesus Christ would be the authority on the written word, that's really all there is to it

Click to expand...

I agree that He is THE authority. I also know that He revealed Himself, the Father, and OT mysteries to His inspired apostles. And, we have His Word recorded by NT writers.

So, there really is a little more to it than you've expressed here.

Bknight006 said:

If Jesus rules the Earth from the US, then I've officially lost faith in Him. Keep in mind that this is an American saying this.

Click to expand...

Puns aside, I agree with you, the body that is the church exhibits some severe neurological disability. Bits of it might follow the lead of the Lord for a time but for the most part.....if I had a dog that was this much out of control there would be some serious behavioral modification happening. I speak as much about myself as anyone else here but what part of Lordship do we not understand?

Anguspure said:

Puns aside, I agree with you, the body that is the church exhibits some severe neurological disability. Bits of it might follow the lead of the Lord for a time but for the most part.....if I had a dog that was this much out of control there would be some serious behavioral modification happening. I speak as much about myself as anyone else here but what part of Lordship do we not understand?

Click to expand...

I think there is the recognized visible church that most agree has historically drifted into apostasy and various heresies. Then there's the true church, the invisible body of Christ. The true church has continued faithfully through the centuries. God has always had a faithful remnant and has promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.

Anguspure said:

It is a book that can only be understood in the light of everything else (Biblically speaking) written before it, so in that respect I wouldn't say that it is weakly supported, more weakly understood because of a lack of understanding about the rest.

Click to expand...

I meant that there are only a scant few greek texts of the book, and of those texts, they quite often disagree with each other.

ananda said:

I meant that there are only a scant few greek texts of the book, and of those texts, they quite often disagree with each other.

Click to expand...

Do you have evidence for this claim "those texts, [Revelation] they quite often disagree with each other?"

I was thinking when debating in a general theology thread, that when one makes a mistake in literal interpretation, and the wall is breached......

then there is no longer any rational barrier stopping us from interpreting the Bible in all our minds, as we will, all different and all unique.

in which there would be no organization, no harmony, no anything.

because the Bible would be reduced to mush, and to foggy poetry, nothing more.

we must use the same rules we apply to civil law, and mathmatics, and chemistry and apply them as well to other literal works....

such as the Bible.

there is no honesty with interpreting the prior with literalism, but not the Bible.

if society can't run on laws that are metaphorical and allegorical, how should we expect the maker of the universe to do so?



7.2. The Art and Science of Interpretation

http://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...on/the-art-and-science-of-interpretation.html


The practice of interpretation is known as hermeneutics.

The word hermeneutics is ultimately derived from Hermes the Greek god who brought the messages of the gods to the mortals, and was the god of science, invention, eloquence, speech, writing, and art. As a theological discipline hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible.1

Bible study consists of three primary steps: observation, interpretation, and application.2 . After observing the text, interpretation should yield the understanding of God’s Word which He intended resulting in its fruitful application in the life of the reader. If interpretation goes astray, then a proper understanding will not result and the application of God’s message to the life of the reader will not be what God intended.

Our position is that the book of Revelation is to be interpreted normally, like any other writing, and especially like the rest of the Scriptures. We part company here from those who seek to classify the book as being representative of the apocalyptic genre so they can apply a mystical or spiritual “spin” to the text and make it mean all manner of things.

D.L. Cooper gives a reasonable definition of normal interpretation in his Golden Rule of Interpretation:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.—The Golden Rule of Interpretation, D.L. Cooper3

I really like this guy,

he used to teach at my home churches, mother church facility

http://www.douglashamp.com/category/bible-study-with-douglas/bible-study-revelation/

plus he has load of modules for the free bible software, called TWsoftware, the word software.

and loads of tutorials on how to use it.

free is good, I like free.

Ripheus27 said:

I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

Click to expand...

I think you hit the nail on the head my friend.

If we looked at the book objectively, would we be pleased with the results?

gradyll said:

I was thinking when debating in a general theology thread, that when one makes a mistake in literal interpretation, and the wall is breached......

then there is no longer any rational barrier stopping us from interpreting the Bible in all our minds, as we will, all different and all unique.

in which there would be no organization, no harmony, no anything.

because the Bible would be reduced to mush, and to foggy poetry, nothing more.

we must use the same rules we apply to civil law, and mathmatics, and chemistry and apply them as well to other literal works....

such as the Bible.

there is no honesty with interpreting the prior with literalism, but not the Bible.

if society can't run on laws that are metaphorical and allegorical, how should we expect the maker of the universe to do so?



7.2. The Art and Science of Interpretation

http://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...on/the-art-and-science-of-interpretation.html


The practice of interpretation is known as hermeneutics.

The word hermeneutics is ultimately derived from Hermes the Greek god who brought the messages of the gods to the mortals, and was the god of science, invention, eloquence, speech, writing, and art. As a theological discipline hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible.1

Bible study consists of three primary steps: observation, interpretation, and application.2 . After observing the text, interpretation should yield the understanding of God’s Word which He intended resulting in its fruitful application in the life of the reader. If interpretation goes astray, then a proper understanding will not result and the application of God’s message to the life of the reader will not be what God intended.

Our position is that the book of Revelation is to be interpreted normally, like any other writing, and especially like the rest of the Scriptures. We part company here from those who seek to classify the book as being representative of the apocalyptic genre so they can apply a mystical or spiritual “spin” to the text and make it mean all manner of things.

D.L. Cooper gives a reasonable definition of normal interpretation in his Golden Rule of Interpretation:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.—The Golden Rule of Interpretation, D.L. Cooper3

Click to expand...

I understand your point but the solution is not to blindly interpret the Bible literally. The problem I see with many who claim to take a literal approach is they often end up missing the true intentions of the authors. Or, they inconsistently abandon their literalism to make a text fit their premise.

Though we should never settle for speculation or a subjective method of interpretation we must make every attempt to discover the true meaning even when symbolism and metaphors are used. If the author employs non-literal language we must not interpret the text literally.

Paul used allegory to explain the two covenants:

Galatians 4:22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.

23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.

24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.

25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.

I realize that Paul clearly pointed out that he was using allegory in this text but we find the use of figurative and metaphorical language throughout Scripture.

We should make every attempt to discover the intended meaning and not simply apply a wooden literal meaning to the text.

I didn't read your whole post.

but I did see that you make a basic logical flaw.

in that you stated this:
"the solution is not to blindly interpret the Bible literally"

but see you are assuming that God in his wisdom and truthfullness would make the scriptures in general, allegorical.

If you were writting an instruction manual on how to live life in a dangerous environment that dealt with death and eternal Hell, and start talking in symbology, and allegory?

How beneficial would that be for those trying to navigate the dangers?

or how beneficial would it be for those trying to escape from impending peril?

it would simply be a map of garbage, something to be tossed in the trash.

The Bible is a map for life, it is literal.

all the symbols of revelation are encoded messages, that need decrypting via daniel and the prophets. In those instances the purpose was not to relay truth, but to hide it. SAme thing with the parables, the purpose was to keep those who were unworthy of life changing truth from hearing the words that would save their souls, but to the diciples alone he gave the interpretations of the parables.

See parables, and allegory are the exception, not the rule.

and that is documented and proven in my illustrations above, that an allegorical instruction manual would be useless, and an allegorical sybolic map would likewise be useless.

Barraco said:

I think you hit the nail on the head my friend.

If we looked at the book objectively, would we be pleased with the results?

Click to expand...

among those of conservative theological seminaries, and among ones who believe in verbal plenary inspiration. Revelation itself is not that widely disputed. It has a few outlines of how to interpret it, and it is not uncommon in the circles I have been in, to have such outlines memorized word for word. There are many expositors who have delved into revelation, there really is not excuse in the day of information, not to hold literal views of the Bible.

if people don't believe in literally, they are living in deception.

they are living with the girlfriend, but won't commit to marriage.

to them God and others are just play things to be toyed around with when they are lonely and bored, but not enough importance to commit to communication or understanding of what that person is saying or needing.

If we cannot love those who we see, how can we love God who we do not see.

When we believe in an unliteral Bible, we are believing the enemy and going down without a fight.

if there are contradictions, which many of us assume there are, then instead of changing the bars regarding inspiration and verbal plenary views, lets tackle these questions one at a time together.

my favorite book when doing home bible studies, and classes at local churches, was Norman Geisler's book on When Critics Ask. That book was sufficient to reveal that many simply don't want to understand the literal Bible, because if it were true then other versus, such as versus regarding Christ's lordship:

!!!ONLY THOSE THAT REPENT OF EVERY SINGLE LUST OF THE EYES, AND LUST OF HE THAT DOES THE WILL OF GOD WILL HAVE ETERNAL LIFE:


“Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father in not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.”-1 John 2:15-17


“If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.”-1 John 2:29


“And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.” -1 John 2:25



“These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and they ye may believe in the name of the Son of God.” -1 John 5:13



!!!WHOEVER SINS HAS NOT SEEN GOD, HE THAT DOETH GOOD WORKS IS SAVED:


“Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” -1 John 2:6-7


18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. -1 John 5:18


!!!WHOEVER IS BORN AGAIN DOES NOT SIN, HE THAT DOESN’T DO GOOD WORKS IS A CHILD OF DEVIL:


7Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is born[1] of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. -1 John 3:7-10


[1]a is born: or, has been born