That is the way I see it. Anything in any verse which if translated literally, would refute preterist presuppositions, you have it figuratively referring to something else, e.g. heaven and earth = Israel.
As I said, in my opinion, your method is flawed because you're imposing your literalistic bias on the text in order to refute the Preterist position.
I didn't go to Isaiah looking to support my view. However, as I read this passage it is immediately clear that God did not literally plant the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth when he said to Zion, "you are My people."
It seems so obvious I'm surprised anyone would try to dispute it. Which is why I'm suspicious of your motives for doing so.
No I absolutely do not recognize your position as the correct one! Perhaps you need to repeat this over and over until you remember and understand what it is saying, "If the plain sense makes good sense, then it is nonsense to look for any other sense."
Nope, no need. I've shown that your mantra is subjective since what is plain to one is not plain to another. The plain sense of Isaiah 13 is that he employed figurative language to think otherwise is nonsense.
That you can find scholars who translate Isa 51:16 essentially as it appears in modern versions does not prove that the heaven and the earth refer to Israel and they do not prove that the LXX and Targum are wrong.
I didn't "find" scholars to prove your selected versions wrong. The literal translation along with the simple reading the text supports my view.
The text is clearly identified as figurative by the words "as it were." There is no such textual identification in Isa 51;16.
Of course it's figurative, that was my point!
My point was related to Josephus: "that third part thereof which was within the four pillars, to which the priests were not admitted, is, as it were, a Heaven peculiar to God."
To which you replied, "This does not say that a part of the temple
was heaven and earth but "as it were heaven."
Though you implied that I was saying the temple "was" heaven, my point was, the Jews saw the temple
figuratively as heaven.
Is. 51:16 needs no textual identification since the term itself applied to Israel identifies it as figurative.
I agree there is figurative language in the Bible. But figurative language in one place does not prove figurative language in another place.
We completely agree. That's why I've taken time to show that each passage in question stands on its own containing figurative language.
No they don't give anybody "the license to interpret passages, long thought to be literal, in a spiritual, or even allegorical manner" in just any old way they want to
Which is why I added: "However, we are not free to impose our ideas on the text,
we must remain within the context established by the inspired NT writers."
and especially when the new interpretation is evidentally agenda motivated to make passages support religious doctrines which did not exist until the 19th century or later. As I have said repeatedly there are guidelines for interpreting scripture figuratively.
Which is why we must focus on Scripture and not allow our bias to drive our thinking. Your research is flawed if you think this interpretation did not exist until the 19th century.
The guideline you've presented is a subjective maxim, as I've pointed out. You have proven that as you've revised your original position. Though you've tried to deny that fact, it's really undeniable just go back and read the posts. You seem to think your personal opinion is the
plain sense and an opposing one is
nonsense.
Such as making heavens and earth mean Israel without any scriptural precedence?
Deut. 32:1 & Isaiah 56:16 establish scriptural precedent. You simply refuse to acknowledge it.
At this point we've both stated and discussed our positions sufficiently. We're now just repeating ourselves.
Let me summarize my stated position on the three main passages we've discussed then I'll move on to other issues.
1. Isaiah used
figurative language to describe God's use of one nation to judge and destroy another nation. (Is. 13:1-17)
Isaiah, Babylon, the Medes, the day of The Lord, the destruction, the transfer of kingdoms are understood
literally. These are all verified in history.
The following is figurative language and is not intended to be taken literally:
The stars of heaven and their constellations Will not give their light.
The sun will be darkened in its going forth.
The moon will not cause its light to shine.
I will shake the heavens.
The earth will move out of her place.
You denied my position then continued to admit Isaiah used
hyperbole, which is
figurative language, and said v. 13
may be figurative (and of course it is).
My position stands.
2. Isaiah used the
figurative term "heaven and earth" as he recounted God's actions toward His covenant people. (Is. 51:16)
The context of this chapter is God comforting Zion, His nation, His people.
God
planting the heavens and laying the foundations of the earth is presented as the result of God's actions toward His people, putting His Words in their mouth, covering them with the shadow of His hand, and calling them His people.
Though you continue to avoid the obvious, it remains obvious.
My position stands.
3. Moses, addressing the "
heavens and earth," gave the song of Moses as an instructional tool for
Israel to teach her children throughout her generations.
He began, “
Give ear, O
heavens, and I will speak; And
hear, O
earth, the words of my mouth."
This
figurative language in the text was directed to, and only to,
Israel.
"So Moses came with Joshua the son of Nun and spoke
all the words of this song in the hearing of the people. Moses finished speaking
all these words to all Israel."(Deuteronomy 32:44, 45 NKJV)
Moses began by addressing the
heavens and the earth, telling them to
hear the words of his mouth. At the end of the address the text says he "
spoke all the words of this song in the hearing of the people." Therefore, the term "
heavens and earth" is used figuratively as Israel.
My position stands.
Thanks Der Alter, may God bless