The Genre of Revelation is in dozens of non-biblical books back then, and has certain rules in reading it!

[eclipsenow]

WHAT GENRE IS REVELATION?​

Revelation is not literal at all, but a genre called Apocalyptic Symbolism. There are literally dozens of these works from 200 BC to 200 AD - and theologians I read and respect have studied them and know the special syntaxes and grammar and imagery - they know the 'rules' for reading this stuff. Check Britannica for an introduction. Apocalyptic literature | Description, End Times, Eschatology, Prophecy, & Examples | Britannica

Lay Christians sometimes just ignore all that and think they can jump in with their largely Hollywood defined expectations of the text - and basically try to do a "Dan Brown" on the text to interpret "What it means to me now." They ignore that nearly every futurist timetable about Revelation has already failed. EG:

View attachment 360885

These people be like, "Hermeneutics? What's that?"

WHEN IS IT SET?​

In short, John wrote a sermon on suffering TO his generation, ABOUT his generation! It's not about us.

The Roman persecution was about to start against Christians. Now - because it is not our favourite subject - us - is it suddenly irrelevant? No more than Paul's letter to the Corinthians is 'irrelevant' to us because it is not about us specifically! We just have to do our homework and understand the imagery, and what the issues were 2000 years ago.

ARE FUTURISTS EVEN READING THE INTRODUCTION?​

Are futurists even reading the first chapter? AS IF John would write to his friends - who are about to see their children thrown to the lions in the arena - and say "You guys think you've got it bad! Wait till you see what happens in 2000 years!"

Instead, John says it is to show them what will "SOON take place". They should OBEY (1:3) his letter for the time is NEAR. (How do you obey a message about some arbitrary timetable 2000 years later?) They are to KEEP it. Finally - in 1:9 John says he is their partner in THE tribulation. Not just a little suffering - like he's got an afternoon headache. But THE tribulation - the big one! What's happening? He's in exile on the island of Patmos because of the Romans. It has already started! And it's about the Romans.

It honestly confuses me how anyone can rip this out of context and shove it 2000 years in John's future!

Instead of a future timetable, Revelation is sermon reminding them of the foundational gospel events, it has certain ways of describing the Roman governors and proconsul (Beast, False Prophet, etc in Chapter 13) - and most of all, it covers certain general themes of suffering and judgement we see in this life.

Historian and theologian - Dr Paul Barnett wrote the classic "Apocalypse Now and then". He describes the patterns of 7.

There are:-
7 SEALs depicting Tyranny in government,
7 TRUMPETS depicting Chaos in nature,
7 SIGNS depicting Persecution,
7 PLAGUES depicting Destruction.

Note - they're not in a neat order. The trumpets start after seal 5. Others jump in at other points. They are all mixed in together. Why?

Because these are themes, not specific events! John writes them as happening all together and all mixed up. These themes are concurrent, not consecutive - a waltz that goes around and around themes, not a march through some hypothetical future timeline. Because they happen along side each other (a common tactic in the Apocalyptic literature of the time) they are called parallelisms.

Kind of like we see life now. We see wars. We see tyrants. We see the persecution of Christians in other countries. We see natural disasters and chaos in nature. We see destruction. We also see wealth, and even the spiritual danger of a post-scarcity society! All mixed in on the same planet.

It's just so hard to understand without doing the hermeneutics.

THE FAMOUS MARK OF THE BEAST!​

For example - Chapter 13 has the famous mark of the beast. People see that as this fearful economic tyrant coming in the future sometime - but it's relevant now! The danger is here now. And it always has been. Jesus warned of it in his gospels. What is that danger? The lure of money and trusting in other things - like the powers of the State rather than God. That was relevant to Ancient Israel that thought they would just make deals with Egypt or Assyria or whoever - trusting in political alliances rather than God. It's Jesus warning that his kingdom is not of this world - and we are not to trust in Mammon. John brings up this image of an Old Testament prayer where you put the law on your forehead and right hand and recite a certain prayer. But what happens in Rev 13? They wear the mark of the Roman Caesar on their forehead and right hand! It's not literal - this is how the genre works. It's symbolic. They're trusting in the wealth and security of the State. Just as we are tempted to today!

How do we know this? "Compare and contrast" is a common tool in Apocalyptic Symbolism. In the very next Chapter we see people who did the right thing, and were killed for it. The martyrs, in heaven. They also get a mark - God's mark on their forehead! But I take it this is not literal - as Jesus never mentioned a detail like our bodies being marked in a weird way. It's symbolism.

Have you heard of the Bible Project? It’s famous - not just some random youtuber. The author has a Phd in EXACTLY this topic - Hebrew apocalyptic symbolism - but they also offer great summaries of all the books in the bible. High quality stuff - worth bookmarking!

Watch these two 11 minute videos. (They’re up to 4.65 million hits!)

Back to Dr Paul Barnett - he has read the other apocalyptic literature of the time - and knows how the key Hebrew symbolism works. He was also is on the board of a secular university’s history department, was also a Sydney Anglican Bishop, and has received an Order of Australia medal. (I know his family and have met him a few times - and he is a great guy - warm and funny.) Do yourself a favour. Buy this - and do it as a personal quiet time. The imagery builds, and has uncomfortable truths. And that's the whole point!
RTBT Revelation: Apocalypse Now and Then

 

[Laodicean60]

I wanted to ask a question, in those two verses I mentioned in the other thread, is symbolism?

 

[RandyPNW]

WHAT GENRE IS REVELATION?​

Revelation is not literal at all, but a genre called Apocalyptic Symbolism.

I believe Revelion is, of course, symbolic. But it is tied directly to Daniel's prophecies, particularly in Dan 7.

 

[eclipsenow]

I wanted to ask a question, in those two verses I mentioned in the other thread, is symbolism?
----

The two witnesses say ALL tribes and nations will see them lying in the streets. We don't have that tech yet.

Rev 11:8
And their bodies will lie in the main street of Jerusalem,[fn] the city that is figuratively called “Sodom” and “Egypt,” the city where their Lord was crucified.

Rev 11:9
And for three and a half days, all peoples, tribes, languages, and nations will stare at their bodies. No one will be allowed to bury them.

I've timed this one directly to the 2 witnesses

The second one is our ability to buy or sell we don't have that capability yet. CBDC might be the start of this but it will take a long time to do away with all the other forms of currency.

Rev 13:17

And no one could buy or sell anything without that mark, which was either the name of the beast or the number representing his name.

Timed it directly to the beast stuff

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

Are futurists even reading the first chapter?

Yes. And you have the timeline is in verse 19 'Write therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are to take place after this.

In chapters 2&3 you have the age of the Church - 'those that are' in verse 19
Then chapter starts with 'After this'. It is the 'after this from verse 19 in chapter 1. After what? After the age of the Church.

The book of revelation is chronological, except for 3 interludes.
You even have time described a lot in revelation so you can follow everything chronologically.

Chapters 1-3: age of the Church
Chapters 4-18: Daniel's 70th week, a.k.a. the week of Jacob's trouble, the 7 year tribulation
Chapter 5: God's throne in Heaven, glorified Church
Chapter 6: The Lamb of God breaks the seals, first 6 seals out of 7
Chapter 7: 1st interlude (between 6th and 7th seal), Designation of the 144,000 from Israel. Gentile believers from the tribulation
Chapter 8: The 7th seal is broken and it starts the blowing of trumpets, 7 angels will blow the trumpet
Chapters 10-14: 2nd interlude between blowing of the 6 and 7th trumpet. The second interlude - mighty angel, 2 witnesses, woman and dragon, antichrist and his empire
Chapters 15-16: The 7th trumpet announces 7 vials of the wrath of God which will be poured 1 by 1, now we are in the second half of tribulation, this will be the biggest persecution of the Jews there ever was. Between the 6th and 7th vial of wrath we have the 3rd and final interlude, preparation for Armageddon.
Chapters 17-18: 7th vial of God's wrath - Judgement of Babylon
Chapter 19: Marriage Supper of the Lamb in Heaven, Armageddon on Earth
Chapter 20: Satan bound for 1000 years, resurrection, literal millennium Kingdom. Satan released and the end of 1000 years, Gog and Magog. Judgement: Fire from Heaven. The big white throne, resurrection.
Chapter 21-22: New Earth and New Heaven, New Jerusalem, eternity.

Instead, John says it is to show them what will "SOON take place". They should OBEY (1:3) his letter for the time is NEAR

This is no different that Christ saying He is coming soon. God lives outside of time. Also John did not know when the events would happen, that's why we wait for Christ every day, because we do not know which day He will return.

Have you heard of the Bible Project? It’s famous - not just some random youtuber. The author has a Phd in EXACTLY this topic

Well I know few Jewish Christian men who are also scholars and speak the language fluently and are more qualified than Bible Projects, and they believe the same as I do about the book of revelation. Now what?

Yes, there are many scholars that believe what you say, and there are also many who are futurists and believe chapters 4 to 20 are 7 years, and then the literal millennium. See, it is not easy. Maybe you are right, maybe I am. Christians will probably bicker about this until Christ comes.

Not even the Church Fathers agreed on the millennium. Polycarp, the disciple of John was a pre-mil.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

I've timed this one directly to the 2 witnesses

I'm sorry, but I cannot agree on that interpretation of the 2 witnesses. It ignores too many verses in rev 11 and it falls apart under scrutiny.

First of all, the Greek word for witness in rev 11 is the word mártyras. The English word 'martyr' derives from this. So the 2 witnesses will be 2 actual people, not some allegory or symbolism, as I will show in other verses.

These will be two literal people. Like they were in Zechariah 4.
Zechariah 4 describes the vision the prophet has of the olive trees and lamp stands, representing Zerubbabel and Joshua.
So are the two witnesses in Rev 11, two literal people.

Rev 11:6 They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire.

Does the Church have the power to shut the sky and change water into blood?

7 And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them,
Can the Church be killed?

8 and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.
Does Church have a body in will it lie on a street?

9 For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb,
Will people gaze at the dead bodies of the Church?

11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.

So you are telling me the Church will died, people will cheer and they will exchange gifts, then the Church gets resurrected after 3 and a half days? Will they stand up on their feet and will people see them?

It makes zero sense for the two witnesses to be the Church. Looking at the context of Rev 11, we clearly see the two witnesses will be two people.
You have to bend and ignore the text in Rev 11 so much in order to get Church or any other allegory. It just does not make sense.

The two witnesses are Moses and Elijah.
The two witnesses perform miracles associated to both Moses (turning water to blood, see Exodus 7) & Elijah (power to shut the sky, no rain. See 1 Kings 17).

Moses & Elijah appeared to disciples on mount of transformation. The disciples knew who they were despite no one telling them it's Moses and Elijah and disciples never seen them before, as if the disciples expected both Moses & Elijah to come. Jews, even today, pray at the end of Sabbath for God to send Elijah.

Yes, they are symbols in the book of Revelation, but not everything is symbolic. The Scripture is meant to be taken literally, unless specified otherwise by the language, the text, the grammar etc. When we allegorize everything, it falls apart and makes zero sense.
Like when calling satan bound an allegory.

 

[Laodicean60]

I've timed this one directly to the 2 witnesses

Interesting, but lamp stands have other symbolism.

 

[eclipsenow]

This is no different that Christ saying He is coming soon. God lives outside of time. Also John did not know when the events would happen, that's why we wait for Christ every day, because we do not know which day He will return.

Except that those who know how Apocalyptic Symbolism actually works reject that John was writing about 2000 years later. That's just Hollywood speaking! Apocalyptic Symbolism dresses up the regimes and geopolitical concerns of that day in theological language.

Also please note that Jesus never says he is coming soon outside of Revelation. He says stay ready because he will return like a thief in the night - but that's different.

Well I know few Jewish Christian men who are also scholars and speak the language fluently and are more qualified than Bible Projects, and they believe the same as I do about the book of revelation. Now what?

Really? Want to compare Phd's? Please list names and qualifications - with sources to verify - and I'll do the same.

But the real thing is to look at the quality of the arguments and whether they ring true to the hermeneutics of the genre.

Yes, there are many scholars that believe what you say, and there are also many who are futurists

This is largely a more recent phenomenon since the influence of the Schofield bible in America. It's not based on great arguments. It ignores the many other apocalyptic texts of the time - and John's clear emphasis in the opening chapter.

Please don't take offense at my tone below - and my silly example of a poem. If there's any snarkiness it's not at you - it's at this whole rather narcissistic culture we live in. I really think the entertainment culture we live in has dumbed down our approach to hard academic study of the bible.

The genre of Apocalyptic literature has certain rules and systems. The wiki lists 24 other non-canonical apocalypses written about 200 BC to 200 AD. But as we will see - the summary on wikipedia shows that these were mostly concerned with addressing the geopolitical concerns of the day - dressed up in theological symbolism. Just look at all the Non-canonical works!
3 Enoch
Apocalypse of Abraham
Apocalypse of Adam
Apocalypse of Moses
Apocalypse of Sedrach
Apocalypse of Zephaniah
Apocalypse of Zerubbabel
Aramaic Apocalypse
Gabriel's Revelation
Genesis Apocryphon
Greek Apocalypse of Baruch
Greek Apocalypse of Daniel
Greek Apocalypse of Ezra
Sefer Elijah
Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch
Non-canonical
Apocalypse of Golias
Apocalypse of Paul
Apocalypse of Peter
Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius
Apocalypse of Samuel of Kalamoun
Apocalypse of Stephen
Apocalypse of Thomas
Coptic Apocalypse of Elijah

As the Wiki says:​

"Apocalypse" has come to be used popularly as a synonym for catastrophe, but the Greek word apokálypsis, from which it is derived, means a revelation. It has been defined by John J Collins as "a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, in that it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial, insofar as it involves another, supernatural world." Collins later refined his definition by adding that apocalypse "is intended to interpret present, earthly circumstances in light of the supernatural world and of the future, and to influence both the understanding and the behaviour of the audience by means of divine authority."​

The genre of Jewish and Christian apocalypse flourished c. 250 BCE–250 CE, but its antecedents can be traced back much further, in the Jewish prophetic and wisdom traditions (e.g., Ezekiel 1–3 and Zechariah 1–6), and in the mythologies of the Ancient Near East, which have left a legacy of symbology (e.g., the sea as a symbol of chaos in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13:1). Zoroastrian dualism may also have played a role. The reasons for its rise are obscure, but there seems to be a connection to times of crisis, such as the 2nd century BCE persecution of the Jews reflected in Daniel's final vision, or the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE reflected in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.​

Apocalypse - Wikipedia​

John cared for HIS generation that the Romans were about to stomp on! He says he was writing to them - but we know from history there was at least 10 large churches across Asia Minor at the time. He chose 7. The universal number. So he's also writing instructions for the whole church across all time - not just writing a book that will be largely USELESS for 2000 years until the 'special generation' arrives who can finally understand it! I mean, as if!

Just imagine the Spirit-Filled Apostles - eyewitnesses of Jesus death and resurrection to whom he specifically gave authority to write scripture - were alive today and you knew something bad was coming in your country. John replies to you:-

“On Mars most red in 4000 AD,
The Cybers will Zap, and the Wozgards will be,
Unstoppable! Unbeatable! So they'll have to flee!
Now you in the 21st - OBEY this prophecy!”

Huh? What do you know about the Cybers and Wozgards on Mars in a few thousand years? My silly poem makes as much sense to you as a futurist reading of Revelation would to John's generation - and every generation since! A futurist reading literally ignores the literary conventions of what this genre is all about.

John said he SHARED in the tribulation! It was near, soon, and he wanted them to OBEY his letter! How can you obey something if it's primarily about stuff that will happen about 30 lifetimes after you die of old age!? How does it help you? How is John being pastoral? Your families are being fed to the lions - and he's going on about the Cybers and Wozgards? What? How can it help you if you don't even have a CLUE what it's all about?

Modern futurist interpretations would mean nothing to them. Most modern futurists don't actually have a single point of reference or basic CLUE on how to even start reading Revelation in the first place. They just don't even know what it is.

and believe chapters 4 to 20 are 7 years, and then the literal millennium. See, it is not easy. Maybe you are right, maybe I am. Christians will probably bicker about this until Christ comes.

See I agree. It isn't easy! It requires a Phd in apocalyptic symbolism to get - or at least - figuring out how to choose the right people with the best Phd's and arguments. One has to actually do some work. But us lazy westerners grow up with our presuppositions and watching "The Omen" or other Hollywood silliness about 'decoding Revelation' and think - "Ah, that's what it's about! That means it's the best book in the bible! Because it's all about me, and my impressions of the world, and who I can cast as the bad guys!"

Not even the Church Fathers agreed on the millennium. Polycarp, the disciple of John was a pre-mil.

There was some disagreement back in the day - and you are right in that it is not a salvation matter. Phew!

But a literal reading of the Millennium contradicts most other verses in the NT. As an interpretive grid, it prioritises some of the most highly symbolic and hard to understand writing over some of the clearest writing on the Return. But that's a whole other subject with dozens of other verses - and I've already gone on too much in this post.

 

[Douggg]

Jesus's return, His Second Coming is in Revelation 19;

Also in Ezekiel 39:21-29 is Jesus Himself speaking in the text having returned to this earth, His Second Coming.

So, Ezekiel 39 gives the 7 year framework which the events noted with time frames in Revelation will take place.

That framework is...

Gog/Magog event
then the 7 years in Ezekiel 39:9
then at the end of the 7 years, Ezekiel 39:17-20 is the feast on the dead bodies in Revelation 19:17-21.
then, Ezekiel 39:21-29 is Jesus Himself speaking in the text having returned to this earth.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

Really? Want to compare Phd's? Please list names and qualifications - with sources to verify - and I'll do the same.

First we have the many churchfathers Irenaus, Justin Martyr, Pseudo-Barnabas, Papaias and many more preminiallists. Not to mention Polycarp who was a disciple of apostle John. Who knew better about revelation and millenium than John, and the fact that his disciple believed this cannot be omitted.
Is this enough of a qualification?

But fine, let's look at the modern Christians. George Eldon Ladd, an evangelical New Testament scholar and professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary.

Henry Alford, a Greek scholar. Guess in what language was the book of revelation written?

Should I cite more scholars? Or is this enough for you?

And I haven't even mentioned Christian scholars from Israel. For example Rick Yohn, former Dean of Biblical & Theological Studies in the Adult & Graduate Department for Colorado Christian University. He continues to teach both in the Bachelors and Masters Degree Programs.

wiki

Wikpedia. Really?

Non-canonical works

Exactly. They are non-canonical for a reason. But if you want to look at them, you might want to start with Enoch.

John said he SHARED in the tribulation! It was near, soon, and he wanted them to OBEY

Revelation was written in 95 AD, well after the events of the fall of Jerusalem.

Hollywood

What about hollywood? What kind of argument is that when churchfathers believed in literal kingdom. I don't know what hpllywood says I dont even watch the tv and movies.

But a literal reading of the Millennium contradicts most other verses in the NT.

Does it? First, a proper method of interpreting Scripture requires that Scripture be interpreted in a way that is consistent with its context. This means that a passage must be interpreted in a way that is consistent with the audience to which it is written, those it is written about, whom it is written by, and so on. It is critical to know the author, intended audience, and historical background of each passage one interprets. The historical and cultural setting will often reveal the correct meaning of a passage. It is also important to remember that Scripture interprets Scripture. That is, often a passage will cover a topic or subject that is also addressed elsewhere in the Bible. It is important to interpret all of these passages consistently with one another.

Finally, and most importantly, passages must always be taken in their normal, regular, plain, literal meaning unless the context of the passage indicates that it is figurative in nature. A literal interpretation does not eliminate the possibility of figures of speech being used. Rather, it encourages the interpreter to not read figurative language into the meaning of a passage unless it is appropriate for that context. It is crucial to never seek a “deeper, more spiritual” meaning than is presented. Spiritualizing a passage is dangerous because it moves the basis for accurate interpretation from Scripture to the mind of the reader. Then, there can be no objective standard of interpretation.

You have Ezekiel's temple. A temple of such size and description never existed. Neither it is the Church, otherwise you wouldnt have 8 chapter on description of the Temple, including the kitchen.

You have the promise God gave to Abraham in gen 15 about the lamd of Israel, which has not been fullfilled yet.

Isaiah 65:20. “No more shall there be in it an infant that lives but a few days, or an old man who does not fill out his days, for the child shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed.

Are people who die 100 years old today considered young? No, this is simply a future time.

When will satan be chained and stop deceiving nations as described in chapter 20? And don't tell me now, because it makes no sense.

I shown you on the two witnesses why allegorizing everything is dangerous and falls apart. I was hoping you would provide a counter argument, but nothing.

Pick some events from revelation and we can discuss when they happen(ed).

Or Matthew 24, which will schock you, has mostly has not been fulfilled yet. Let's have some Bible verses and have a discussion.

 

[eclipsenow]

Jesus's return, His Second Coming is in Revelation 19;

Also in Ezekiel 39:21-29 is Jesus Himself speaking in the text having returned to this earth, His Second Coming.

So, Ezekiel 39 gives the 7 year framework which the events noted with time frames in Revelation will take place.

That framework is...

Gog/Magog event
then the 7 years in Ezekiel 39:9
then at the end of the 7 years, Ezekiel 39:17-20 is the feast on the dead bodies in Revelation 19:17-21.
then, Ezekiel 39:21-29 is Jesus Himself speaking in the text having returned to this earth.

And you think Gog / Magog in Ezekiel is literal. Why exactly?

What is this image of Gog made of? What are the ingredients in the clothing and description and getup? Where else in Ezekiel have we seen these characteristic parts?

And why use Ezekiel as an interpretive grid over Revelation - when John wrote Revelation borrowing from the other, older books to make an even clearer framework and message?

 

[eclipsenow]

First we have the many churchfathers Irenaus, Justin Martyr,

"I and many others are of this opinion, and believe that such will take place ... but, on the other hand, many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.”
TLDR: "Many... think otherwise" Justin Martyr

Pseudo-Barnabas, Papaias and many more preminiallists. Not to mention Polycarp who was a disciple of apostle John. Who knew better about revelation and millenium than John, and the fact that his disciple believed this cannot be omitted.
Is this enough of a qualification?

I would love you to quote some actual Polycarp that proved that statement definitively. I've not read a lot of the early church fathers, but understand there is some ambiguity around Polycarp's own views?

But fine, let's look at the modern Christians. George Eldon Ladd, an evangelical New Testament scholar and professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary.

Henry Alford, a Greek scholar. Guess in what language was the book of revelation written?

Language isn't the issue - understanding the genre is. Unless the student has a Phd in all the non-canonical books and actually understands the type of literature they are approaching - they will come to it with the wrong presuppositions. Which of your scholars have that?

And I haven't even mentioned Christian scholars from Israel. For example Rick Yohn, former Dean of Biblical & Theological Studies in the Adult & Graduate Department for Colorado Christian University. He continues to teach both in the Bachelors and Masters Degree Programs.

Again - same question.

Wikpedia. Really?

Yes - really. It's a diving off point - a gateway. If you don't know how to use it - that's not my problem.

Exactly. They are non-canonical for a reason. But if you want to look at them, you might want to start with Enoch.

I never said they were scripture. I said it was a common genre of writing at the time as a background to doing due diligence in our hermeneutics.

Revelation was written in 95 AD, well after the events of the fall of Jerusalem.

Maybe - but others disagree.
And even if it was - Roman persecution kept breaking out intermittently until Constantine.
Domitian's reign may not have had as much persecution - and maybe in my writing I'm sometimes a bit given to the dramatic.
But even the fact of the earlier persecution under Nero would have required explanation. How could God allow such a thing? Isn't his kingdom meant to be now? Isn't Jesus reigning? John answers these questions - with a reminder that in this period between Jesus Resurrection and Return - this stuff would still recur.

What about hollywood? What kind of argument is that when churchfathers believed in literal kingdom. I don't know what hpllywood says I dont even watch the tv and movies.

I'm saying that the whole modern Millennial view that Revelation is somehow a future timetable is largely from the influence of the Scofield Bible, and also Hollywood movies like The Omen, Numbers, and many other movies that imply we can somehow figure out our immediate future by checking for clues in Revelation.

Just like most previous generations tried to... and failed!

Finally, and most importantly, passages must always be taken in their normal, regular, plain, literal meaning unless the context of the passage indicates that it is figurative in nature.

Absolutely false. There is no such rule! The main rule is first reading the whole body of literature to understand what genre you're even dealing with! Otherwise you'll end up with an entirely forced 'literalistic' framework that is hampered in even detecting the kind of writing genre you have. EG: "Now we know Jesus didn't REALLY look like a lamb and have 7 eyes and 7 horns - so THAT is obviously a metaphor. But what about these giant locusts? Are they literal?"

It boggles the imagination that people just refuse to do the hermeneutics and try and understand what genre they are reading in the first place.

Spiritualizing a passage is dangerous because it moves the basis for accurate interpretation from Scripture to the mind of the reader.

Sure, except for the fact that...

You have Ezekiel's temple. A temple of such size and description never existed. Neither it is the Church, otherwise you wouldnt have 8 chapter on description of the Temple, including the kitchen.

....Ezekiel wrote a number of chapters of apocalyptic symbolism that are not meant to be taken literally if someone bothers to do the hermeneutics! For instance, Gog isn't literal - it's an amalgamation of the other kingdoms Ezekiel has already described. The temple is this beautiful super-temple with living waters that come down the front steps and bring a new creation to the local land. A wind whips through the valley of dry bones, creating a new people of God.

Then Jesus rocks up to the woman at the well and says worshipping in a specific mountain or temple isn't important - instead worshipping in spirit and truth is. He says HE is the living water that lets people live forever. Elsewhere HE is the true temple. He says the Holy Spirit creates new birth - going where it will. He has created a new kingdom that is not of this world. He has created the church to be the true temple. We are a chosen people, holy priesthood etc etc....

If anyone spiritualises the text - it's Jesus. Oh and then Paul, and the book to the Hebrews, and Galatians, etc etc etc.

You have the promise God gave to Abraham in gen 15 about the lamd of Israel, which has not been fullfilled yet.

The concept of God reserving a special land is irrelevant to Christians. His kingdom is to spread across the globe!
See Acts 1. The disciples STILL don’t get it! They no doubt had these Old Testament promises to Abraham to give the kingdom to Israel all the way out to the Euphrates river - a picture of an enormous empire. But Jesus corrects them. The new kingdom is going to be even bigger!

Acts 1:

6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

THE KINGDOM IS NOT GEOGRAPHIC
John 4 - speaking to the woman at the well. Jesus explains his very identity is tied into the fact that he is the one who will abolish geographic considerations! Elsewhere Jesus explains he is the temple. (Fulfilling Ezekiel’s vision of a huge super-temple.) Then Jesus says he is the living water that will abolish geographic considerations when worshipping God in ‘Spirit and truth”. That’s the living water pouring down the steps of Ezekiel’s super-temple vision - a river that brings something like a new Eden to the entire Middle East. I think that’s a hint at heaven.
Jesus said “My kingdom is not of this world”. He gave us the Great Commission and the verses above about how when the Spirit arrives, his gospel is to go all over the whole world. The church is now the kingdom of God - without such Old Covenant notions of “Jew and Gentile.” We are all one in Christ. To go back to geopolitical and ethnic considerations is to start to attack and pull apart the weave of the entire gospel.
The church is now everywhere. EG: 1 PETER is addressed to God’s people - and look how far spread out they are.

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,

But then in 1 Peter 2 we see who these people really are. ALL the identifying functions of old Israel are bound up in this gospel focussed ‘spiritualisation’ of older geopolitical realities. God’s people are the church.

1 Peter 2
"9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

THE LAND AS METAPHOR FOR HEAVEN
Hebrews 11 shows that by faith Abraham struck out for the new land - but he and his allies had his focus on something much bigger!

...16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them."

Hebrews 12 puts the final nail in the coffin of the idea of a special land. It sounds like the church now fulfils Jesus promise that we would not so much worship from special places, but special hearts.
As long as we worship in spirit and truth - just as Jesus said to the woman at the well when he confirmed he was the living water!

22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

Jesus is the temple where God and man meet in the incarnation. He is the true reality. But today, we are the super-temple - moving out across the globe. 1 Corinthians 3:16 We are the ‘one humanity’ made from both Jews and Gentiles. Ephesians 2.
Reading Old Testament prophecies literally that the Lord Jesus himself and Spirit inspired apostles said were fulfilled spiritually is going to distract from the gospel, make it smaller, take the focus off the gospel and onto today’s spurious geopolitical issues - and warp the churches priorities. And alas, we see the influence of the American evangelical, obsessed with Israel, happening in the middle east right now.

 

[Douggg]

And why use Ezekiel as an interpretive grid over Revelation - when John wrote Revelation borrowing from the other, older books to make an even clearer framework and message?

Have you read Ezekiel 39:17-20 and compared it with Revelation 19:17-18 ? The verses are talking about the same event at the end of 7 years.

Ezekiel 39:
17 And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl, and to every beast of the field, Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh, and drink blood.
18 Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan.
19 And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken, of my sacrifice which I have sacrificed for you.

Revelation 19:
17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

 

[JulieB67]

Are futurists even reading the first chapter?

Are you?


Against my better judgement I'm posting on this thread because of comments like this. Revelation means to reveal, it is not a sermon no matter how many experts and videos you post. We are on God's time frame and we know one day is like a thousand years to God and vice versa.

But we are fortunate because Christ foretells us all things including the time frame in the very first chapter. John was in the Spirit on the Lord's day which is just another way of stating the Day of the Lord. It was not a day of the week. A day of the week was never described that way. Traditions of men later on turned it into a day of the week. Which would not make sense with what Christ is telling him, which is to describe what was, is and yes is future of that time period -the Lord's day/Day of the Lord. So we are already in the future at that point of time. One of the reasons we can know this is from the description of Christ which is the same as his arrival in chapter 19 -his return. He even has that two edged sword (symbolic of the truth of the Word most likely) That's one of the biggest keys to understanding Revelation. John relates what is past of the Lord's day, present, and what happens after that as we see in the later chapters. It's nothing to fear or panic about. People only fear the unknown but Christ is revealing the truth. I always find if ironic that you are in complete panic mode over Global Warming as a Christian and yet accuse many others of panicking over God's Word. Many might, but again, the only thing to fear is the unknown.

As someone suggested, it would be nice if you would post a complete breakdown of Revelation with verses and show why you believe the way you do instead of videos and experts. We must always put God's word over man's and go from there. And yes, there is a lot of symbolic language in Revelation but that doesn't change the fact that most of the events are in the present and future of the Lord's day/Day of the Lord.

Revelation 1:3 "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand."

Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

We know our Father sees time differently. Christ has not returned so the time is still at hand.

 

[eclipsenow]

Have you read Ezekiel 39:17-20 and compared it with Revelation 19:17-18 ? The verses are talking about the same event at the end of 7 years.

I know that - but the New interprets and fulfils and upgrades the Old. The Old provides a foundation - but we have to be very sensitive to the fact that the New sometimes takes it in bizarre, larger, spiritual directions. Also - there is good evidence that the way Ezekiel wrote was also apocalyptic symbolism about Judgement Day - that it's not necessarily a literal description of a literal battle - but a theological description of the final defeat of ALL of God's enemies. Whatever that actually looks like when it happens!

Check it out.

Chapters 38 to 39: God will defeat all the evil in the nations. Gog is from Genesis 10 – a powerful enemy nation – and the way Ezekiel describes Gog is as representative of ALL the enemy nations against God. Gog has bits and pieces of the descriptions of Egypt and Tyre and Ammon etc. Gog is an amalgamation representing all of the evil powers Ezekiel has previously described rolled into one. Gog gets judged so thoroughly it requires 3 symbolic acts that cannot be literal - because each is so devastating nothing would be left for the next! Trying to put them all end-to-end literally is ridiculous - but each has its own unique description of destruction worth taking to heart. We do not want to be God’s enemies. There is earthquake, fire, and bodies being left in the fields to be eaten by animals for 7 years. The massive earthquake is so utterly destructive that no body would be left to be burned, and the fire so destructive no body would be left to rot in the field. It’s Ezekiel’s vivid symbolism describing the awful judgement against the nations that will fall when the Lord returns.

 

[eclipsenow]

But we are fortunate because Christ foretells us all things including the time frame in the very first chapter. John was in the Spirit on the Lord's day which is just another way of stating the Day of the Lord. It was not a day of the week. A day of the week was never described that way. Traditions of men later on turned it into a day of the week. Which would not make sense with what Christ is telling him, which is to describe what was, is and yes is future of that time period -the Lord's day/Day of the Lord. So we are already in the future at that point of time.

I know important theologians that see John's "Lord's Day" as simply Sunday - and others that see it more as a theological statement about the new age in which we live. (Being the Last Days, 2000 years and counting - see Acts 2 and Hebrews 1.)

One of the reasons we can know this is from the description of Christ which is the same as his arrival in chapter 19 -his return. He even has that two edged sword (symbolic of the truth of the Word most likely) That's one of the biggest keys to understanding Revelation. John relates what is past of the Lord's day, present, and what happens after that as we see in the later chapters.

It's just John repeating his symbolic language about Jesus and the fact that those who believe are saved and those who do not believe are already condemned by their rejection of God's word. It's as symbolic as the Elder's Thrones, Jesus being described as a slain lamb with 7 horns and 7 eyes. It's about theological reminders, not timing; comforting gospel truth, not some bizarre timetable set 2000 years later.

Imagine you are concerned about some brewing anti-Christian regime in charge of your country. You have access to one of the disciples that was with Jesus for 3 years! He sends you a letter of comfort to memorise and obey, and it says:-

“On Mars most red in 4000 AD,
The Gluk will fromble!
So the N-krackt must Chee!”

Now obey this! I mean - what the? Every time futurists get their over excited, shaking hands on Revelation and think “I’m so going to Dan Brown this today! I can crack this code!” and start applying stuff randomly to modern nation states and geopolitical events removed 2000 years from John’s audience - I just wince! Modern futurist interpretations would mean nothing to John’s audience - or most of the church for the last 2000 years. It’s just embarrassing!

It's nothing to fear or panic about.

I agree. Revelation is a book of comfort written to both John's generation about the Romans, but also in such terms that it is a general descriptions of this era we live in. It's a gospel sermon about the gospel! "He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ."
It's the gospel applied to the suffering in this world.

People only fear the unknown but Christ is revealing the truth.

Not according to you! He's hiding it to all but a very special last generation who get to 'understand' it - and make 666 different futurist timetables a year - all of which fail. (See what I did with that symbolic number there? )

I always find if ironic that you are in complete panic mode over Global Warming

Again - Revelation is a book of both warning (do not sin!) and comfort to me and Amils like me. It's more likely to be the futurist youth that is running around asking whether or not they should even get married because he fears we 'might' be in the Last Days! (Again - we've been IN them for 2000 years - Acts 2, Hebrews 1).

In the same way, you have misunderstood my view on climate change.

Climate change is a moral matter, not a matter for panic. That is, it is something to care about, not panic about. Just as a Christian should always trust that the Lord Jesus is sovereign and in control of history, we should trust him when he says to love our neighbour as ourselves! There are plenty of things that fall into this category. Are our kid's OK? Are they walking with the Lord? Are they becoming alcoholics? What about our friends, neighbourhood and community? What can we do to reduce the evil in this world of youth hopelessness, youth suicide, racism, cults, Islam, pornography, crime, rape, misogyny, misandry, storms, war, genocide, poverty, and famines?

What would Jesus have us do - worry or care? Or get all spiritual, run out into a cave like an old school monk - and maintain a stubborn navel-gazing indifference to all these things? How is this loving God with everything we have, and loving our neighbour as ourselves!?
James 1: “Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. …. Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”

We must always put God's word over man's and go from there.

I believe in the sufficiency of scripture - so of course God's word comes first. But in studying it and comparing scripture with scripture I don't want to end up running on Dunning-Krueger's - if you know what I mean! (If you don't - google it.) That is - I don't see the theologians I read as more authoritative than the bible - as if they are "Protestant Popes". I'm tired of explaining this to people who seem reluctant to read theology.

Revelation 1:3 "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand."

Revelation 22:7 "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book."

We know our Father sees time differently. Christ has not returned so the time is still at hand.

These are 2 different verses. John says the time is near, it is at hand, and he is unpacking this Revelation which is the gospel because he already shares in THE tribulation. SO yes! Because Christ has not returned we ARE still in the Millennium - of 2000 years and counting.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

and comfort to me and Amils like me.

The problem with Amils and Postmils
Is that you basically say Israel forfeited all its promises.

Forfeited all its privileges, forfeited all those things that God declared in covenant that He would give to them in the future; and they forfeit it by their disobedience to the Mosaic Covenant, by their apostasy from true religion and by their rejection of their Messiah. Therefore, Israel has been permanently set aside, so that the only kingdom will be that kingdom that we call the church, ruled by Christ, either expanding to take over the world, or existing in the world, and finally in heaven.

But Chirst comes pre, not post; He comes before. He will return to an increasingly wicked earth, He will come in fiery judgment, He will judge all the ungodly of all the earth, and then establish His rule and His kingdom forever. The first phase of that eternal rule will be His reign on this earth, which will last - as Revelation 20 says six times - a thousand years, after which His rule will continue, because it is an everlasting rule, but it will continue in a new heaven and a new earth that replace this heaven and earth, which will melt in an atomic implosion and make way for the new creation.

Is the Old Testament amillennial? Were the Jews of Jesus’ day amillennial? Was Jesus amillennial? Were the prophets amillennial? Were the early theologians amillennial? If we’re going to buy into amillennialism - that there is no future kingdom on earth and there is no future kingdom in which the promises to God to Israel are going to come to pass because they’re now coming to pass spiritually in the life of the church, either on earth in the church age, or in heaven - if that is our view, then we would expect that somewhere in the Bible somebody would affirm that. Like Old Testament writers, the Jews of Jesus’ day, Jesus Himself, the prophets and apostles of the New Testament and even the early church theologians. Somebody has got to come up with this in and around Scripture, so let’s ask the first question.

To say that the writers of the Old Testament were amillennial when they were writing about a kingdom is a strange thing to say, right? To say that they were writing about a kingdom that they knew was not going to come is a very strange thing. And one would have to ask, how could they be inspired to writing details about a coming kingdom promised to Israel - and through Israel to the Gentiles as well - a great glorious Messianic kingdom - you can’t imagine that they were receiving this revelation from God, writing it down and at the same time they were writing it down, they knew it wasn’t so. That’s absurd. Of course, they would believe that it was true.

If Old Testament promises were actually for the church, and not for ethnic Jews, ethnic Israel, then those Old Testament promises are meaningless; they are utterly unintelligible, and they are irrelevant to the Old Testament reader. But this is essentially what you’re left with if you take an amillennial view; the New Testament is the starting point for understanding the Old Testament, and what you’ve just done is damage any meaningful interpretation of the Old Testament on its own.

And this is basically what leads to what we call spiritualizing the Scripture; spiritualizing the Scripture - that is, taking texts out of their literal sense, spiritualizing them into some other than literal sense.

So, when you take the New Testament concepts, theology, ideas, teaching, instruction, revelation, impose it upon the Old Testament, twist and turn the Old Testament like a piece of clay into whatever shape you wanted to, you really have adulterated the authorial intent of the Old Testament, which can stand on its own. But, you see, replacement theology demands the Old Testament be viewed through the lens of the New Testament. It demands that the Old Testament be viewed through the apostasy of Israel, which they could never have known about.

It also strikes a very strange dichotomy, because all the curses pronounced on Israel in the Old Testament have been fulfilled literally to Israel. And in the passages which pronounce cursing and blessing, cursing and blessing, back and forth - you obey, you get blessed, you disobey, you get cursed - we know the history of the cursing. It was Israel cursed. It is Israel who disobeyed; it is Israel who then feels the weight of the punishment of God. All of the curses, we could say, were fulfilled literally on Israel; why would we say all the blessings will be fulfilled literally on the church? You can’t split. You can’t create that dichotomy in a given passage, because you have convoluted the intent of the passages. If it is literally Israel that gets the curses, it will be literally Israel that gets the blessings.

Another way to look at it is all the prophecies regarding Jesus’ first coming were fulfilled literally, right? Bethlehem, the donkey, the colt, the foal of an ass, betrayed by a friend - detail after detail after detail after detail. Even in the Psalms it said that He would say, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” That He would be thirsty and want something to drink. That He would be pierced. That His legs would not be broken. All of that is in the Old Testament; detail, detail, detail, detail. If all of the prophecies regarding His first coming were fulfilled literally, then that establishes the precedent that all of the prophecies related to His second coming will also be fulfilled literally.

So, we ask the question again: is the Old Testament amillennial? Using normal language, normal interpretation, understanding the clarity of the Old Testament, understanding that it stands on its own, we simply need to see what it says. The Old Testament must be interpreted, preached, and taught and believed as clear revelation from God that is to be understood; and we’re held responsible for it.

 

[eclipsenow]

The problem with Amils and Postmils
Is that you basically say Israel forfeited all its promises.

What an interesting post! Polite but challenging, and deeply thoughtful about how we take the integrity of the Old Testament seriously. The short answer is it's not my tribe that spiritualists the Old Testament - but Jesus and the Apostles. But I respect the thoughts expressed here enough to copy and paste them into my notes and ask these questions when I approach OT eschatology.

I wish more people here would post in a similar manner!

I've already blogged too much this week and am meant to be finding a job - but do you have a specific OT passage in mind? (It might take a few days to get back to you.)

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

What an interesting post! Polite but challenging, and deeply thoughtful about how we take the integrity of the Old Testament seriously. The short answer is it's not my tribe that spiritualists the Old Testament - but Jesus and the Apostles. But I respect the thoughts expressed here enough to copy and paste them into my notes and ask these questions when I approach OT eschatology.

I wish more people here would post in a similar manner!

I've already blogged too much this week and am meant to be finding a job - but do you have a specific OT passage in mind? (It might take a few days to get back to you.)

Thank you for your kind reply. This is how Christians should debate, with respect.

When it comes to eschatology in OT, I recommend Zechariah, the Revelation of OT.

When it comes to Israel, I always recommend Hosea 1 & 2 where God does indeed divorces His wife Israel, but He takes her back in chapter 2. The Lord will again call Israel 'my people' and they will call Him 'my God'

Jeremiah 31 from 31st verse until the end.

As Paul says in Rpman 11 28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers

God Bless

 

[eclipsenow]

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY - THE 'UNFOLDING PLAN OF GOD'
I was just wondering why your post had such an impact on me yesterday. I think it is the way you asked us to take the Old Testament on its own terms. It reminded me of my first subject in my bible diploma through Moore Theological College Sydney - intro to Biblical Theology. (Sadly it's the only subject I finished - life changed and I had to do other things.)

Biblical Theology is all about recognising where a chapter sits in a phase within a particular book, where that book sits in its section in the Old Testament (IE: Before Abraham, after Abraham, Moses Covenant, pre-Israel's exile, pre-Judah's exile, the Return under Persia, post-exile), and where that section sits in the unfolding plan of God in relationship to Jesus death and resurrection - then finally where it fits in the whole Bible. The focus is always on the unfolding narrative - seeing it in context. Respecting the immediate concerns of the author and audience, and respecting what that author had in their background, their expectations, and their future focus.

It is NOT a hop-skip and flip your way through the bible trying to bash some proof-verses into a Systematic Theology.

Hermeneutics happens first, then Biblical Theology, then Systematic Theology. But of course Systematic Theology can interact with Biblical Theology for particularly difficult passages.

Anyway - your post chimed with the disciplines in Biblical Theology - even though you seem to have arrived at very different outcomes. Moore Theological College is unashamedly Covenant Theology - and have some of the biggest names in the business! (Australia punches well above our numerical weight in theological discourse.) So on my bookshelf I have According to Plan and Gospel and Kingdom by Graeme Goldsworthy, The Search for Order and The Faith of Israel by William Dumbrell. These are mostly just on Biblical Theology - but Search for Order does trace eschatology through the bible as well.

The history of the Protestant Reformation is majority Covenant Theology - seeing the promises to Israel as all fulfilled in Christ (in Eschatological Tension - the now and not yet - aka Inaugurated Theology).

Basically I see Covenant Theology as the gospel. Just as we no longer have to sacrifice animals to be saved, nor do we have to literally obey the ethno-nationalist Israeli laws. Instead we obey the principles behind the laws - the Sermon on the Mount. Just as we no longer need a temple or high priests - but have Jesus speaking for us in heaven, we no longer need to worry about obtaining and running some sort of theocracy in the war-torn Middle East. In recognition of your last post I did a little research on Zechariah, and inserted my findings into my new summary post of the End Times and the Land.

BEFORE WE GET THERE - THE SEARCHING of the OT PROPHETS?
I Peter 1:10-12 teaches that the prophets searched and inquired as to the meanings of their prophecies. This suggests that they were waiting for additional revelation that wouldn't come until Jesus.

OT prophets recorded their visions in terms and ideas they were comfortable with - but the NT often totally reinterprets them and applies these prophecies to larger, cosmic ideas.

The OT prophecies were so unclear to people living at the time that by the first century we had different sects like the Pharisees and Sadducees - who denied any kind of resurrection! If the OT prophecies about ‘the coming kingdom’ were so clear as to be Millennial - why did such a large Jewish group reading the Jewish scriptures not even believe in the resurrection of the dead!? With such ambiguity and confusion - no wonder people who heard Jesus exclaimed they had never heard any teaching like it - and with authority!

LITERAL FULFILLMENT? REALLY?
Today's geopolitical focus on the land in the Middle East seems to drive the way many want to read the bible and OT literally in some respects - but it's blinkered and inconsistent. They are quite happy for other aspects to be completely 'spiritualised'. EG: Jesus didn't literally defeat Satan by standing on the head of a serpent. He did it by dying on the cross and being resurrected. Jesus isn't literally a lion. He isn't literally a lamb. He isn't literally a cornerstone. He isn't literally a sacrifice in a temple - but became one on a Roman cross! Also - the entire sacrificial system in book after book of the OT is essentially a prophecy of what Jesus did on the cross. Yet when it comes to the OT promises about restoration to the land - for some reason that’s got to be literal? Especially when the Lord and Spirit guided Apostles seem to give us a clear indication that it is already fulfilled spiritually?


END TIMES AND THE LAND

GRACE
Jesus so over-fulfils the OT law and sacrificial system so that we no longer need a high priest or temple - because Jesus replaces them. In the same way, the promises to Abraham that his children would be God’s people living God’s way in God’s land - and that this would bless the whole world, is fulfilled in Jesus living as the perfect Israelite, dying in our place, forgiving our sins, rising to new life to show that it worked, giving us hope of a new creation (as his body ran by the rules of the new reality as a guarantee of what was to come.)

KINGDOM
Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world. Jesus rebukes the disciples when they ask about an ethno-religious state in Israel and gets them to focus on the gospel going out to ALL people - even enemies - even the ends of the earth! Acts 1:8.

SUPER-TEMPLE
He told the woman at the well that because he is the living water, where we worship would soon be irrelevant - as long as it was in Spirit and truth. John 4. Jesus IS the perfect temple where God and mankind meet in perfect incarnation. He is Ezekiel’s “super-temple” - with the living water rushing out to make a new creation! Ezekiel’s super-temple cannot be literal - in the vision he stands on a mountain higher than Jerusalem to see the whole thing and this mountain does not exist. Amillennial Interpretation of Ezekiel 40-48 | Monergism
Zechariah 14 also visualises a terrible earthquake coming from the Mount of Olives - and then living water spreading out to renew the world. But as we have seen, this is all fulfilled in Jesus. He said if they had faith, they could say to this mountain fall into the sea! It’s a reference to the fact that Jesus is the one who splits the mountains - who makes the temple irrelevant.

PRIESTHOOD
1 Peter 2 shows we are all the priesthood and holy nation. That fulfils the end of Zechariah 14 where everyday cooking items are like the most precious items in the temple - the sacred and secular are now both sanctified in Christian life. WE are now the temple of God. 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19. We are the ‘one humanity’ made from both Jews and Gentiles. Ephesians 2

LAND
Hebrews 11 shows even Abraham himself and other patriarchs were not really aiming for ‘the land’ - but for heaven! “16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them."
Just as Zechariah reminds Israel that Jeremiah’s prophecies of a Messiah at the end of 70 years of exile can only be fulfilled if they remain obedient and keep the covenant, which reinterprets Jeremiah’s prophecies in the unfolding plan of God for Israel - so the gospel does for the Old Covenant but in much more dramatic and universal ways.

Hebrews 12 puts the final nail in the coffin of the idea of a special land. Just as Jesus told the woman at the well, we no longer worship from special places, but special hearts. Wherever we are, when we pray we are united as if we were all standing in Jerusalem itself! But the billion plus Christians alive today physically would not fit! (Forget any crowd crushes in the Muslim Haj - this would be apocalyptic!) But of course - this is the advantage of the New Testament reality of the ‘spiritualised’ gospel fulfilment of Old Testament concerns and promises. Everything is so much bigger!

Hebrews 12:22 “But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.”