The Book of Revelation cannot be one hundred percent literal.

2BeholdHisGlory · May 16, 2021

SongOnTheWind said:
God isn't on the fence about anything, He knows His perfect will, and He Himself declares the end from the beginning. Jesus was tempted when He walked on earth as a human, but now returned to glory as God, and we know that God cannot be tempted as stated in His Word, we see that Jesus can no longer be tempted in the same way. However, He is longing for His Bride, and He is longing to drink of the fruit of the vine with her at their being reunited.

If 2BeholdHisGlory would clarify, I would love to know more about she had in mind when she wrote her post, but that is up to her to disclose. Who can read another's thoughts? Who can know the mind of God? And yet we are told to have the mind of Christ. Let His mind be in our minds. Amen?

If God says something in His Word, I may not understand it, but I WILL take it seriously.

Shalom

What do you mean? The part that I said that I am a fencesitter on eschatology? Or end of the world type scenarios?

I am though, because I dont study it enough so I am not qualified to say anything affirmatively except for ask questions concerning what is written.

RickReads · May 16, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
This is a cryptic message I have managed to decipher by highlighting the most crucial points.

You are sitting on the fence because you sense that God Himself is wavering, but Jesus is still a human and he can still be tempted like any other human.

The trick is not to give in to such temptations, despite the diplomatic pressures and social peer pressures by multilateral conspirators whose only concern is to save their respective countries from inexorable destruction, albeit expressly in direct opposition to the Will of God, for it is the divine will to have such countries condemned to destruction.

You don't know what God believes?

However, God is telling you that the Millennial Kingdom can neither be the UK or USA, but it can only be France!

Consequently, there is no need to prophesise again because God will never detract from this viewpoint.

That is my answer to your final question in bold letters.

Because I don't think that the UK and USA could ever be divided in terms of international conflict and the UK cannot be entrusted with such a military secret, which they would simply divulge to the Americans in order to prevent the War of Armageddon happening.

Rather than disclose such information to the UK or USA I would much rather share this information with the French.

Because I don't trust either the UK or USA, and they cannot be allowed to obtain such information under any circumstances.

That is my answer, so are you with me or not?

You think the Millennial Kingdom is France? Did I understand that rightly?

Bouan Philippe · May 16, 2021

2BeholdHisGlory said:
Come again?

If this is an ultimatum, then I obviously reject your suggestion because the Second Coming of Christ can still be postponed instead of accepting such terms, which are not acceptable at all.

SongOnTheWind · May 16, 2021

2BeholdHisGlory said:
What do you mean? The part that I said that I am a fencesitter on eschatology? Or end of the world type scenarios?

I am though, because I dont study it enough so I am not qualified to say anything affirmatively except for ask questions concerning what is written.

Just anything more you had to say. I am genuinely interested. You seem intelligent, honest, and grounded :oldthumbsup:

2BeholdHisGlory · May 16, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
If this is an ultimatum, then I obviously reject your suggestion because the Second Coming of Christ can still be postponed instead of accepting such terms, which are not acceptable at all.

I would suggest you reject everything I say. I don't put much of a value on my own opinions.

When I just said "come again" I was asking if you could you repeat what you just said. I said nothing on the second coming of Christ (unless you are trying to tell me something here?).

I honestly cannot follow what you are talking about, I just wanted you to repeat it for me in clearer words.

2BeholdHisGlory · May 16, 2021

SongOnTheWind said:
Just anything more you had to say. I am genuinely interested. You seem intelligent, honest, and ground

Theres nothing more I can say. I mean as a fencesitter someone can go either way on a thing depending on what is shown them (so they can reevaluate where they stand on a thing) so they really are not sure of all things (obviously). I can point to what something says, but that does not mean I understand it, I just build on them as I go.

I need more IN-put and less EX-put (Is that even how you say it?) ^_^

And thanks for the pat on the back, I know you mean well and being freindly by saying that but I am really not all that intelligent ^_^

Wish it were so, I can be as dumb as a box of rocks.

SongOnTheWind · May 16, 2021

2BeholdHisGlory said:
Theres nothing more I can say. I mean as a fencesitter someone can go either way on a thing depending on what is shown them (so they can reevaluate where they stand on a thing) so they really are not sure of all things (obviously). I can point to what something says, but that does not mean I understand it, I just build on them as I go.

I need more IN-put and less EX-put (Is that even how you say it?)

And thanks for the pat on the back, I know you mean well and being freindly by saying that but I am really not all that intelligent Wish it were so, I can be as dumb as a box of rocks.

We all have our blonde moments

Also, we all build on what we seek to understand. Nobody knows everything. We all see in part and we're all just figuring this out.

Be blessed, sis. Shalom

Bouan Philippe · May 16, 2021

2BeholdHisGlory said:
I would suggest you reject everything I say. I don't put much of a value on my own opinions.

When I just said "come again" I was asking if you could you repeat what you just said. I said nothing on the second coming of Christ (unless you are trying to tell me something here?).

I honestly cannot follow what you are talking about, I just wanted you to repeat it for me in clearer words.

Could God be trusted to choose Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to be the spiritual epicentre in the Old Testament?

Presumably, yes.

Therefore, could he be trusted yet again to choose the spiritual epicentre in this modern age?

Or, should the epicentre be determined by the Creation instead of its Creator?

That is what I wanted to say.

2BeholdHisGlory · May 16, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
Could God be trusted to choose Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to be the spiritual epicentre in the Old Testament?

Presumably, yes.

Therefore, could he be trusted yet again to choose the spiritual epicentre in this modern age?

Or, should the epicentre be determined by the Creation instead of its Creator?

That is what I wanted to say.

Thanks for that, and whatever these epicenters are I feel pretty sure God can be trusted to make his own determinations for these things because I dont think I can be. ^_^

Der Alte · May 16, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
The futurist interpretation is mostly a literal interpretation of Revelation, but not every single word could, or should be taken literally.
Obviously, the Lamb is a person who is not a real Lamb as such. Revelation 5:6
The beast is also a person, but not a real beast at all. Revelation 13:1
The "sword" is symbolically used to represent the weapons of modern warfare, but is not an ancient weapon at all. Revelation 6:8
However, it is simply dishonest for anyone to claim that every single word in Revelation must be either literal or symbolic.
Most of Revelation is literal, but not every single word can be literal; it is neither one or the other, but Revelation is both literal and symbolic.
However, it is simply dishonest to pretend that the entire text should be interpreted in "black and white" terms.
Please discuss.
PS. The orthodox theology has maintained that whenever possible, Revelation (and the rest of the Bible) should be interpreted in literal terms, unless such an interpretation is impossible.
Consequently, no chapter in the Bible can be one hundred percent literal or symbolic, but there is no reason to assume that this presents an exegetical problem.

One 18th century scholar E.W. Bullinger found more that 200 figures of speech used in the Bible and wrote a book by that title, "Figures of Speech Used in the Bible." It can be D/L at this link free.
Figures of speech used in the Bible: : Bullinger, E. W. (Ethelbert William), 1837-1913 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
There is an old adage about interpreting the Bible "If the plain sense makes good sense it is nonsense to seek any other sense."
The converse is "If the apparent plain sense does not make sense then another sense should be sought."
For example, Herod was not actually, literally a fox when Jesus called him that. Simon was not actually, literally a stone when Jesus called him Petros, which means stone. James and John were not literally sons of thunder when Jesus called them that.
Many times parables, a figure of speech, are identified as such. Sometimes they are not.

A_Thinker · May 17, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
The futurist interpretation is mostly a literal interpretation of Revelation, but not every single word could, or should be taken literally.

Obviously, the Lamb is a person who is not a real Lamb as such. Revelation 5:6

The beast is also a person, but not a real beast at all. Revelation 13:1

The "sword" is symbolically used to represent the weapons of modern warfare, but is not an ancient weapon at all. Revelation 6:8

However, it is simply dishonest for anyone to claim that every single word in Revelation must be either literal or symbolic.

Most of Revelation is literal, but not every single word can be literal; it is neither one or the other, but Revelation is both literal and symbolic.

However, it is simply dishonest to pretend that the entire text should be interpreted in "black and white" terms.

Please discuss.

PS. The orthodox theology has maintained that whenever possible, Revelation (and the rest of the Bible) should be interpreted in literal terms, unless such an interpretation is impossible.

Consequently, no chapter in the Bible can be one hundred percent literal or symbolic, but there is no reason to assume that this presents an exegetical problem.

It is the rare bible student who thinks that Revelations is 100%, or even mostly, literal.

It is a vision ... akin to a dream ...

Bouan Philippe · May 17, 2021

A_Thinker said:
It is the rare bible student who thinks that Revelations is 100%, or even mostly, literal.

It is a vision ... akin to a dream ...

Consequently, the Bible is an amalgamation of literal words, and symbolic words; but it's an outright lie to pretend that "God is the author of confusion" by allowing such an amalgamation of literal and symbolic words within the same sentence in the Book of Revelation.

The dishonest people who've purposely lied about God's Word in the Bible actually know that it's a lie, but they clearly have an agenda, which is the basis of such lying (Revelation 21:8).

parousia70 · May 17, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
So, you are suggesting that the War of Armageddon, Gog and Magog are both symbolic events, but they are not wars in a literal sense?

Again, please point to where anyone here denies the possibility of a WW3, the way you claim, or retract the claim and apologize for making the false accusation.

Once you take care of that, and demonstrate your agenda here is one of honesty and integrity, I'll entertain responding to your above query.

parousia70 · May 17, 2021

Bouan Philippe said:
the Second Coming of Christ can still be postponed

False.
That day is immovable, fixed in time by God from the foundation of the world.
It is not a moving target based on the actions of men or the whim of God.

Acts 17:31
because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”

2BeholdHisGlory · May 17, 2021

parousia70 said:
False.
That day is immovable, fixed in time by God from the foundation of the world.
It is not a moving target based on the actions of men or the whim of God.

Acts 17:31
because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”

Its okay to keep highlighting ^_^

(Just kidding, I get a kick out of where highlighting begins and ends) its sort of a thing with me lol

parousia70 · May 17, 2021

2BeholdHisGlory said:
Its okay to keep highlighting

(Just kidding, I get a kick out of where highlighting begins and ends) its sort of a thing with me lol

2BeholdHisGlory · May 17, 2021

parousia70 said:

Your such a good sport, Im in a giddy mood ^_^

Davy · May 17, 2021

Tethers, tethers, nothing but tethers.

A tether is like rope tied on a donkey to a pole limiting how far the donkey can reach. That's what man's seminary doctrine battles are about, tethers. Futurism, Preterism, Historicism, they each are at odds with each other.

Futurism does not mean they take all of Revelation, or The Bible, literally. Nor does it mean they believe everything written is for the Future.

There are analogies, allegories, parables, and expressions or idioms that are obvious in God's Word. So to think that it all could be literal is an idea by some new babe in Christ that shows they don't really understand the idea of allegory or metaphors in a language. It shows they need to study more, including more study of language.

RickReads · May 17, 2021

A_Thinker said:
It is the rare bible student who thinks that Revelations is 100%, or even mostly, literal.

It is a vision ... akin to a dream ...

What makes you think that? How, even why would you trust a Bible that doesn't mean what it says?

RickReads · May 17, 2021

Davy said:
Tethers, tethers, nothing but tethers.

A tether is like rope tied on a donkey to a pole limiting how far the donkey can reach. That's what man's seminary doctrine battles are about, tethers. Futurism, Preterism, Historicism, they each are at odds with each other.

Futurism does not mean they take all of Revelation, or The Bible, literally. Nor does it mean they believe everything written is for the Future.

There are analogies, allegories, parables, and expressions or idioms that are obvious in God's Word. So to think that it all could be literal is an idea by some new babe in Christ that shows they don't really understand the idea of allegory or metaphors in a language. It shows they need to study more, including more study of language.

Sounds like you are well-read on that topic. What source of information do you have to support your opinion?

The Book of Revelation cannot be one hundred percent literal.

Still on vacation!

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Still on vacation!

Still on vacation!

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Still on vacation!

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Still on vacation!

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Still on vacation!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads