|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 10:41:05 AM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
quote:
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Just curious......I am not saying you are wrong but just curious how you can be sure just like I am curious how people can know that the number 1,000 is without a doubt absolutely meant to be taken literally.
When taken literally it creates a bunch of holes in the theology that is one reason there is a red flag when I see people take it literally.
I know because Christ is not here now in a physical sense. If you demand a spiritual existence, I still have to require what is promised in Revelation. I do not have it as yet, so it cannot be past. Even if you spiritualize everything there, tell me how those things have come to pass. This existence is nothing like what the bible tells us existence in heaven will be. If all had come to pass, this existence would not be possible.
Wes.....to be honest I am not following your point here......maybe you can reword it in a clearer way? thanks man! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 10:47:59 AM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 1440
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
quote:
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Sorry, jjbird. I will try to clarify. I was addressing these questions mostly. I know that Revelation has not been fulfilled because what is promised to the Christian has not come to pass yet. That means it has to be the future. We can do specific prophecies in another thread if you wish.
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
___________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 10:52:49 AM
|
|
|
yohannan
Posts: 265
Joined: 2/23/2009
Status: offline
|
Hi jjbird,
Could you share with us some of the 'holes' that some see in the other theology.
The prologue of Revelation says those things which were, those things which are, and those things which are yet to come with referrence to time unfolding allocation.
If The Roman Empire saw decline and began another Empire in about 300 or so years, then the seven periods of The Church era could be approximated at about 7 X 300 = 2100 . However, Babylon was 60 years for the Nebucadnezzar (with a seven year eating grass event for pride which signifies the trial to come in macroscope unfolding fulfillment of the last seven years of preMillennial history tribulation period which is shortened to 44 1/2 months for believers) and then 17 years for the next King for a total of 77 years.
1941 + 77 (a seven multiplied by 11 which is the number of the original chosen Apostles or the number of the ten fulfillment leaders who were to come and the false prophet) = 2018 .
For Augustine Rome one can perceive 238 X 7 = 1988 which if 24 is added for the elders, one comes to 2012, which is a significant mentioned date. Also, one can notice that this may not only have spiritual application with no regard to the impositions on times set and seasons physical and perceivable by the numbering of the accountings for dates and times. For the natural things speak of the invisible, for all things made that were made were made through Him and by Him they have their sustaining and being in essence.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
quote:
He would have been lying to the first century church if he was speaking primarily about something to happen thousands of years later and besides how would that encourage the Christians undergoing immense persecution by Rome by telling them that thousands and thousands of years from now Jesus will triumph?
I do not see it that way. He speaks to the Christians of an eternity in heaven. He speaks from the viewpoint of God, so the timeframe is not necessarily mandated as our view of time. John also clarified to the Christians that they had not missed the second coming. He made sure they knew that Christ is coming back. That was their reassurance. Most of Revelation is viewed as future to us because many signs have not been fulfilled. Without them, subsequent actions will not occur.
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Just curious......I am not saying you are wrong but just curious how you can be sure just like I am curious how people can know that the number 1,000 is without a doubt absolutely meant to be taken literally.
When taken literally it creates a bunch of holes in the theology that is one reason there is a red flag when I see people take it literally.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 10:57:32 AM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
quote:
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Sorry, jjbird. I will try to clarify. I was addressing these questions mostly. I know that Revelation has not been fulfilled because what is promised to the Christian has not come to pass yet. That means it has to be the future. We can do specific prophecies in another thread if you wish.
What is promised to the Christian in Revelation that has not been fulfilled that you are speaking about? Just curious
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 4:14:28 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
Whatever we have here I believe it speaks to a perfect binding. John is giving us a picture with a truth to tell. The Devil is totally, perfectly, and flawlessly defeated and bound! This of course with reference to his working through Rome against the Church.
Numbers are symbolic for ideas.
The number 1,000 when used by John has in mind totality in thought! Just like it is used in many many other passages of scripture that John was familiar with and drew from.
Deuteronomy 7:9
9 Know therefore that the LORD your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments.
So does God not keep his covenant of love to the 1,001st generation? Of course not! The number represents totality and completeness!
1 Chronicles 16:15
15 He remembers his covenant forever,
the promise he made, for a thousand generations,
Psalm 105:8 He remembers his covenant forever,
the promise he made, for a thousand generations,
Same point! Thousand represents all and totality and fullness!
Psalm 50:10 for every animal of the forest is mine,
and the cattle on a thousand hills.
Once again is the cow on the 1,001st hill not owned by God? Of course not! All is God's!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 5:48:59 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2558
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
If we allow the bible to interpret itself genres of scripture that uses imagery we can see that the number 1,000 is not literal.
Just like there is no literal dragon since we all know that dragons do not exist. Just like there are no beasts that resemble a leopard that have feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion! (Rev.13)
They are images to convey ideas and truths but not literal ones.
Regarding dragons, there is strong evidence that they most certainly did exist until very recently, and some biologists believe there are places they may still live. The problem people have is that they imagine a dragon in the Tolkien-esque, firebreathing, flying, gold-hoarding, damsel eating sense. In reality, they were/are merely large reptiles of some sort, a la dinosaurs.
Unless of course you think God chose an imaginary beast to use.
_____________________________
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth." - 2nd Timothy 2:24,25
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 5:57:18 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
If we allow the bible to interpret itself genres of scripture that uses imagery we can see that the number 1,000 is not literal.
Just like there is no literal dragon since we all know that dragons do not exist. Just like there are no beasts that resemble a leopard that have feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion! (Rev.13)
They are images to convey ideas and truths but not literal ones.
Regarding dragons, there is strong evidence that they most certainly did exist until very recently, and some biologists believe there are places they may still live. The problem people have is that they imagine a dragon in the Tolkien-esque, firebreathing, flying, gold-hoarding, damsel eating sense. In reality, they were/are merely large reptiles of some sort, a la dinosaurs.
Unless of course you think God chose an imaginary beast to use.
God used imagery all throughout apocalyptic genres of scripture.
Read Ezekiel!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 6:02:30 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2558
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
quote:
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Just curious......I am not saying you are wrong but just curious how you can be sure just like I am curious how people can know that the number 1,000 is without a doubt absolutely meant to be taken literally.
When taken literally it creates a bunch of holes in the theology that is one reason there is a red flag when I see people take it literally.
I know because Christ is not here now in a physical sense. If you demand a spiritual existence, I still have to require what is promised in Revelation. I do not have it as yet, so it cannot be past. Even if you spiritualize everything there, tell me how those things have come to pass. This existence is nothing like what the bible tells us existence in heaven will be. If all had come to pass, this existence would not be possible.
Excellent points, Wes. This is of course the huge problem that preterism and replacement theology can't get around. Jesus hasn't returned, Satan hasn't been cast into the lake of fire along with death and Hades, there hasn't been any period of tribulation, a third of all green things haven't been burned, water hasn't turned to blood, etc etc etc.
The answer is of course that they just spiritualize, allegorize, and symbolize everything away.
_____________________________
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth." - 2nd Timothy 2:24,25
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 6:06:50 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2558
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
If we allow the bible to interpret itself genres of scripture that uses imagery we can see that the number 1,000 is not literal.
Just like there is no literal dragon since we all know that dragons do not exist. Just like there are no beasts that resemble a leopard that have feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion! (Rev.13)
They are images to convey ideas and truths but not literal ones.
Regarding dragons, there is strong evidence that they most certainly did exist until very recently, and some biologists believe there are places they may still live. The problem people have is that they imagine a dragon in the Tolkien-esque, firebreathing, flying, gold-hoarding, damsel eating sense. In reality, they were/are merely large reptiles of some sort, a la dinosaurs.
Unless of course you think God chose an imaginary beast to use.
God used imagery all throughout apocalyptic genres of scripture.
Read Ezekiel!!
Yes, He did. But it was accomplished by using real animals to describe the symbolic animal (the feet of a <real animal>, the head of a <real animal>, the feet of a <real animal>). The dragon is an animal that is recognized by almost every culture around the world because it is a real animal.
_____________________________
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth." - 2nd Timothy 2:24,25
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 6:07:57 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
quote:
How do you know they have not been fulfilled? And how do you know they are signs about the future to begin with?
Just curious......I am not saying you are wrong but just curious how you can be sure just like I am curious how people can know that the number 1,000 is without a doubt absolutely meant to be taken literally.
When taken literally it creates a bunch of holes in the theology that is one reason there is a red flag when I see people take it literally.
I know because Christ is not here now in a physical sense. If you demand a spiritual existence, I still have to require what is promised in Revelation. I do not have it as yet, so it cannot be past. Even if you spiritualize everything there, tell me how those things have come to pass. This existence is nothing like what the bible tells us existence in heaven will be. If all had come to pass, this existence would not be possible.
Excellent points, Wes. This is of course the huge problem that preterism and replacement theology can't get around. Jesus hasn't returned, Satan hasn't been cast into the lake of fire along with death and Hades, there hasn't been any period of tribulation, a third of all green things haven't been burned, water hasn't turned to blood, etc etc etc.
The answer is of course that they just spiritualize, allegorize, and symbolize everything away.
Nothing goes away
All that remains is truth!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 6:10:07 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
If we allow the bible to interpret itself genres of scripture that uses imagery we can see that the number 1,000 is not literal.
Just like there is no literal dragon since we all know that dragons do not exist. Just like there are no beasts that resemble a leopard that have feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion! (Rev.13)
They are images to convey ideas and truths but not literal ones.
Regarding dragons, there is strong evidence that they most certainly did exist until very recently, and some biologists believe there are places they may still live. The problem people have is that they imagine a dragon in the Tolkien-esque, firebreathing, flying, gold-hoarding, damsel eating sense. In reality, they were/are merely large reptiles of some sort, a la dinosaurs.
Unless of course you think God chose an imaginary beast to use.
God used imagery all throughout apocalyptic genres of scripture.
Read Ezekiel!!
Yes, He did. But it was accomplished by using real animals to describe the symbolic animal (the feet of a <real animal>, the head of a <real animal>, the feet of a <real animal>). The dragon is an animal that is recognized by almost every culture around the world because it is a real animal.
Yes he used real parts of animals to create an image of one that was not literally real.
This is your line of reasoning?
And you believe dragons are real?
Ok......it is going to be very hard for me to even take you remotely serious from here on out.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 6:33:58 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2558
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
Yes he used real parts of animals to create an image of one that was not literally real.
This is your line of reasoning?
You just proved my point. References to the dragon all throughout the Old Testament (which is where Revelation pulls a lot of material from) are references to a "literally real" animal.
quote:
And you believe dragons are real?
Ok......it is going to be very hard for me to even take you remotely serious from here on out.
You don't believe dragons are real? Why not? The Bible repeatedly references the "dragon" (or tanniyn in Hebrew), many times in the same passage as referencing a non-extinct animal such as an owl or an asp. The word likely references a large lizard, serpent, or reptile of some sort. Here, learn something:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=dragon*&t=KJV
The animal called "dragon" is an animal common in nearly all cultures around the world, there are thousands of drawings, paintings, and sculptures of dragons interacting with humans and other animals. It isn't hard to conclude that when God referenced a "dragon", his audience knew which animal He was referring to. You are the one getting hung up on terminology, letting your preconceived ideas of mythical dragons from fantasy literature color your interpretation of the Bible.
Just another example of the folly of symbolizing everything you don't immediately understand.
Speaking of being taken seriously, if you dismiss something as simple as the reality of a dragon, resorting to symbolism when it isn't necessary, why should any of us take YOU seriously?
_____________________________
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth." - 2nd Timothy 2:24,25
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 10:47:02 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical words
<1,,1404,drakon>
denoted "a mythical monster, a dragon;" also a large serpent, so called because of its keen power of sight (from a root derk, signifying "to see"). Twelve times in the Apocalypse it is used of the Devil, 12:3,4,7,9,13,16,17; 13:2,4,11; 16:13; 20:2.
Not a literal dragon.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/24/2009 11:40:11 PM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 2252
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Every culture has folklore passed down concerning dragons. When John portrays dragons in Revelation, no one then or now had difficulty envisioning what a dragon looked like. To say that there have never been dragons I think is short sided.
The bible portrays Satan as a dragon…it also portrays him as a snake; similar in nature. I think I would go easy saying there is no connection between the dragon and Satan and that it outside of reality that there has never been such a thing as a true dragon. We can only say we have never seen evidence of one.
But believe what you want jj and if you are convinced that there is no real millennium, well then, no one is going to be able to change your mind. I feel that there is sufficient evidence that the millennium is a real 1000 years but if you want to believe otherwise I sure can’t prove it to you.
Thomas didn't believe either until he seen the truth.
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/25/2009 12:26:14 AM
|
|
|
Retrobyter
Posts: 804
Joined: 8/23/2007
From: Florida
Status: offline
|
Shalom, jjbird.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical words
<1,,1404,drakon>
denoted "a mythical monster, a dragon;" also a large serpent, so called because of its keen power of sight (from a root derk, signifying "to see"). Twelve times in the Apocalypse it is used of the Devil, 12:3,4,7,9,13,16,17; 13:2,4,11; 16:13; 20:2.
Not a literal dragon.
That's Vines. Try another approach: Look up the verses that USE the words so translated!
Revelation 20:2 equates the "drakoon" with the "ho ofis ho archaios," "the original snake." In other words, the snake who tricked Havah (Eve) in Gen. 3:1ff BEFORE he became a snake! The curse to him was that "upon his belly" he would move. His legs were taken away from him! However, the ORIGINAL snake had the legs! I believe that he was a human-sized dinosaur, probably close to the velociraptor. The word "drakoon" in scientific usage today is used to describe "lizards." Wikipedia points out that the word Draco, which stems from drakoon, "...is used in real-world biology for a genus of small gliding agamid lizard."
Thus, although neither Vines nor Strong understood exactly what the Greek word "drakoon" meant and did the best they could with the limited resources they had at the time, the Bible gives us clues as to the nature of this creature. Granted, this is speculation based on the history of the word, but I believe it has merit.
Also, one should note carefully the ORDER of the words in Revelation 20:2. John said the dragon (drakoon), the serpent (ofis) is also called "haSatan" (Hebrew for "the Enemy") and the Devil (Greek: diabolos = "traducer" or "slanderer"), NOT the other way around! That suggests to me that the original legged snake IS the creature who is later called Satan and the Devil, NOT that the Devil, the fallen angel Satan, who some say once was known as Lucifer, entered into the original snake!
The question you must now ask yourself is this: Could the "original snake," the "lizard" (a legged snake or reptile), have been a dinosaur? Did dinosaurs and humans once inhabit the earth AT THE SAME TIME? Evolution would say no, but the Bible presents them together! Who're ya' gonna believe? This could answer another dilemma by pushing it into the realm of the unknown: Did THIS particular dinosaur have the power of intelligent speech? Who can say? We've never even seen a dinosaur alive (that we know of), so how do we know they didn't talk?
Just some things to think about. See, the word "drakoon" does NOT have to refer to some "mythical creature" and COULD have referred to a LITERAL DRAGON (for what else would we call a large reptilian dinosaur that could talk)!
Ponder on!
In the Messiah's love,
Roy
_____________________________
Stick to the Scriptures! The minute you start to draw an analogy or explain what a Scripture means or give a particular view of theology, you've left the safety of Absolute Truth, and you're on your own!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/25/2009 12:58:56 AM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
Ok we do not have to go round in circles whether or not dragons are real.....both of you have proved my point that it is a reference to Satan which means the dragon is not literal but an image pointing to a truth!
The same goes for the 1,000....it is an image of a deeper meaning.
It represents a truth!
Just like when we say its raining cats and dogs you know what I mean!
You do not look into the sky to try and see Fido and Snookums actually falling from the sky!
It is a saying that conveys a real truth that it is raining VERY HEAVILY!
If I am driving down the street and see a sign that says 55 Miles to Atlanta what is more real? The sign itself or the actual city of Atlanta?
The city of course however the sign pointed to something real but was not the real thing itself!
I am completely open to evidence that the 1,000 years is literal however no one has shown me any biblical evidence that it is supposed to be taken literally and not figuratively.
People have made assumptions but have not shown me one thing biblically!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/25/2009 1:38:18 AM
|
|
|
yohannan
Posts: 265
Joined: 2/23/2009
Status: offline
|
Turn on your cable television set and notice that the level of 'graphics' has been rapidly accelerated and is spiritual connotation and/or context of spiritual warfare examplar.
There are many animals in the forest each according to their kind, how much more are the animals and beings in the spiritual realm; both protective and Ministering and also those that fell to the whiles of The Dragon who is from of old very slick and shrewd. Yet, God does not allow one to be tested in a manner that is more than they can overcome for He can establish a defense in the Commanding of Ways and Means of The Kingdom of God angelican.
Thus, since faith is being sure of what one has not seen and confident of what one has not yet experience to have come to pass as a reality one can surmise that there were indeed such animal forms; yet in the case of the devil he has many forms available as shape shifter and clothes himself in light as the accuser of other people before the angels until he was banished from this. However, The Kingdom advance on earth still has this component as part of the Kingdom processes for his kingdom to accuse people to defeat them in a protection or other things. Michael brought no accusation is written.
This is the yeast of the pharisees and is condemned as almost non escapeable regarding pride over other people when all have sinned is the case and to be careful not to judge to condemn someone elses servants for one does not know that is division is not the case but dissension among people who would otherwise be more amiable is not appropriate, yet with patience and endurance one can overcome the so called vyings that the evil one would bring to present oneself in a standing that would be the more accepted. This is the gold refined in the fire that comes patience and holding on to the faith that comes in the grace of God.
Gold in the more pure forms is very maleable and bendable and versatile and is a better conductor of electric current with regards to the purity of the metal because of the lower friction levels at the atomic molecular level. A mole is a large number of atoms together in a weight. This is that ones Testimony becomes stronger. For there is a saying what does not kill the plant can be a pruning to bear more fruit.
Gold bars in fort knox have a certain level (.001) of impurity on purpose to keep enough firmness to maintain shape for these could not even identify Him when He did not want to be identified is written. This is how pure The Lord Is In His Gold.
We are the gold coins of The Lord which he mines to the purity construct required on his market. We are entrusted with a lifetime worth of investment capital, for one talent of gold would be equal to 30 years of a days laborer wages at one dinar per day (which is the minimum wage set in the time of Augustus Caesar at the time of Messiah).
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
If we allow the bible to interpret itself genres of scripture that uses imagery we can see that the number 1,000 is not literal.
Just like there is no literal dragon since we all know that dragons do not exist. Just like there are no beasts that resemble a leopard that have feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion! (Rev.13)
They are images to convey ideas and truths but not literal ones.
Regarding dragons, there is strong evidence that they most certainly did exist until very recently, and some biologists believe there are places they may still live. The problem people have is that they imagine a dragon in the Tolkien-esque, firebreathing, flying, gold-hoarding, damsel eating sense. In reality, they were/are merely large reptiles of some sort, a la dinosaurs.
Unless of course you think God chose an imaginary beast to use.
< Message edited by lelseep -- 6/25/2009 1:50:34 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/25/2009 1:52:36 AM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2558
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
Ok we do not have to go round in circles whether or not dragons are real.....
Translation: I have been proven wrong on a point I was adamant about, so I will now operate as if the point didn't matter in the first place.
quote:
both of you have proved my point that it is a reference to Satan which means the dragon is not literal but an image pointing to a truth!
No, we have shown that you are assigning to the realm of the symbolic things that are literal. If you do so on such a simple thing such as dragons, it doesn't lend much weight to your deeper arguments such as 1,000 being literal.
quote:
The same goes for the 1,000....it is an image of a deeper meaning. It represents a truth!
Negative, Ghost Rider. The pattern is full. It doesn't "represent" a truth, it IS the truth.
quote:
Just like when we say its raining cats and dogs you know what I mean!
You do not look into the sky to try and see Fido and Snookums actually falling from the sky!
It is a saying that conveys a real truth that it is raining VERY HEAVILY!
Because I know English vernacular and figures of speech, and I know when you are using one and when you are being literal. In the same way, those of us with a passing knowledge of Hebrew and Greek are trying to tell you that when 1,000 is used in reference to Christ's reign and Satan's imprisonment, it is a real number.
quote:
If I am driving down the street and see a sign that says 55 Miles to Atlanta what is more real? The sign itself or the actual city of Atlanta?
The city of course however the sign pointed to something real but was not the real thing itself!
Bad analogy. Both the sign that indicates the distance to the city and the city are real. Not following you here.
quote:
I am completely open to evidence that the 1,000 years is literal however no one has shown me any biblical evidence that it is supposed to be taken literally and not figuratively.
People have made assumptions but have not shown me one thing biblically!
You have it backwards. You are starting from an assumption that everything in the Bible is symbolic, whereas the opposite is true: you should assume that the Bible is literal until context demonstrates that it is symbolic. The 1,000 years in Rev. doesn't demand symbolism.
_____________________________
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth." - 2nd Timothy 2:24,25
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/25/2009 8:41:01 AM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 1440
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
Here is another consideration for you. Granted, Revelation is apocalyptic in many instances and uses metaphorical examples. Many of them we do not understand because that information has been sealed until the appropriate time. However, it is not all symbolic. The book was given to us to clarify certain things, and it does that in a very specific way. If God wants us to know something straight out, He says it clearly. Jesus explained His parables. The things that are stated clearly have no need of symbolism.
The animals are representations as are the beast, etc., but there is no need to make realistic truths into something else. Revelation speaks of the wrath of God, the SC of Christ, wars, death, and so on. We can take those things at face value. Now, we can suppose when Christ is returning. We can suppose which countries are represented by the 10 kings. We know pieces of these puzzles, but we cannot say exactly when Christ will return, etc. Why is there a need to symbolise 1000 years?
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
___________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/27/2009 1:43:42 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
I am not coming from a viewpoint that everything in the bible is symbolic.
I come from a view that everything is true! And to be taken at face value!
40% of the bible is poetry!
When taking the apocalyptic portions of Revelation literally you break the most basic rules of biblical interpretation!
When Jesus says repent and be baptized and you will be saved I take that absolutely literal!
However when dealing with imagery and symbolism to illustrate spiritual truths I do not take them literally because that was not the intent of the writer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/27/2009 3:14:23 PM
|
|
|
rawr.ben
Posts: 2728
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
However when dealing with imagery and symbolism to illustrate spiritual truths I do not take them literally because that was not the intent of the writer!
And your point is that the writer's intent was to say, "a long, long time," correct?
_____________________________
rawr.ben
Facebook
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/27/2009 4:05:50 PM
|
|
|
ForeverRedeemed
Posts: 181
Joined: 3/26/2009
Status: offline
|
If the 1,000 years were not literal, why would the Holy Spirit devote eight chapters in Ezekiel to the description of the Millennial temple, right down to the description of the quarters for the singers???
And in Revelation 20:1-7, the Lord mentions it six times as being a 1,000 year reign. So not only is it spoke of in the O.T. but in the new as well.
_____________________________
<----- My Buddy!
"I've been changed from the creature that once I was,
I am no longer in bondage, I've been plunged 'neath the flow -
I'm washed whiter than snow . . .
I am FOREVER REDEEMED!!!!!"
http://goodnewsnow.info
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/27/2009 9:17:37 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 505
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rawr.ben
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
However when dealing with imagery and symbolism to illustrate spiritual truths I do not take them literally because that was not the intent of the writer!
And your point is that the writer's intent was to say, "a long, long time," correct?
It was a Hebrew figure of speech often used throughout scripture
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1,000 years literal or figurative? Why? - 6/27/2009 9:28:28 PM
|
|
|
rawr.ben
Posts: 2728
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
It was a Hebrew figure of speech often used throughout scripture
How Hebrew was John? While he certainly was Jewish, it would seem he would have been born and raised in a more Hellenistic time and community.
_____________________________
rawr.ben
Facebook
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
