Daniel and Revelation are not Puzzles!

4 12 2008

In Matthew 24, when Jesus tells us about the last days, He is as clear as can be! So, what is the problem? Why do so many people get Revelation wrong or have crazy ideas or contradictory theories? Basically, it is because (to say this bluntly), they have not read it! It amazes me how some pastors and Bible teachers can go to a text and not “read it,” but can be really good at “reading into it.” That is, instead of reading what is there, in its context, what the words say in the original languages and culture, we read in our theological ideas, frameworks, and presumptions, and thus totality miss what God is actually saying to us! The other problem is the type of literature in which Revelation is written; many of us just do not understand its type because it is alien to our language, training, and culture; thus, we ignore it or misuse it or look at it as something else.

Apocalyptic genre (literature) has a clear meaning most of the time, when we realize what it is and how it operates.

We need to read the Bible so it is more impacting to us and so we can draw out more information for personal edification and teaching. We need to use the proper rules of interpretation so we stay focused and not read into it what we want. Such rules include context, syntax, word meanings, and grammar; this applies to any type of literature from a textbook, from Shakespeare, to poetry, to a novel. Words are used as communication and expression tools to convey the thoughts and principles of the author; and, in the case of the Bible, what God is saying to us. Thus, we need to know the “terms” (its various meanings as applied to its context) and “audience” (how is it used in the culture and how its readers would see it) of the word to get the most out of it. This includes the form of the word, such as how it is put together in sentence structure and context, and what the “function” of the word is, such as its grammar of voice, mood, person, number, noun, adjective, and so forth. Each of the genres operates a little differently in the form and function of the words. (See our article on the Genres at www.intothyword.org)


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Categories : hermeneutical rules

The Rule of Exegetical Eschatology

4 12 2008

What is Exegetical Eschatology?

This is a from of interpreting “Apocalyptic” writing from what the Bible from what is plainly says, meaning “to draw from.” This is for serious or critical examination of a text of Scripture for the purpose of explanation, clarification, and interpretation.

For the authentic Christian, it provides a better framework of God’s principles and can be a shredder for its critics—as in those who oppose faith and reason or the Truth of Christ and His principles. This is done by examining the facts, details, and essence of a Bible text before making any conclusions. This means we engage the text with careful exegesis, uninhibited by theological prejudice, with an inductive process with open minds to discover God’s lessons for us. What does the original language, genre, and cultural analysis do, considering the original hearers of this work? What did that term mean to John and those seven churches, or what was Jesus saying in Matthew chapter twenty-four, not just what we may think it means today.Otherwise, our preconceived ideas will form our opinions rather than what the Word actually says.

This is how the Reformers, Calvin and Luther, did their studies (although they subscribed to the Historicist view), as well as Augustine (who was mostly a Futurist, but not like the Futurists today) and other great men. They were seeking His revealed truth inductively, applying literal interpretation (if the genre allows), and historical and grammatical exegesis, not mere human speculations and traditions. This is what we seek to do at Into Thy Word.www.intothyword.org

Thus, Biblical Eschatology looks at the whole text in its context and pulls out facts, examining the particulars, facts, and essence of a Bible text before making any assumptions or conclusions. Then, it interprets and applies them.

There are no false teachings or misleading ideas with this method as long as the exegete is honest to the text. The goal is sound, Biblical Theology from the honest exegesis of the Scriptures—not traditions but pure unadulterated truth—not one’s theological framework, but rather biblical truth (see Understanding Apocalyptic Literature for more information).

What does this all have to do with Christianty or church leadership? The sad fact is that too many of our churches are spending too much time and energy on speculative theology while completely ignoring the calls and commands of Christ. While we invent these particulars of nonsense, too many people go un-reached and thus un-discipled because of our foolishness. Let’s stop the nonsense and focus on that to which God has clearly and assuredly called us!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : hermeneutical rules

Rule 2: Context, Context, and Context…

3 12 2008

What does the passage say in its surrounding, in its history, and/or the nature of the word used? The definition of a word is predicated (attached) to the situation and context of the sentence. Is it a metaphor, such as object is defined by how it is described and used in the surrounding sentences? Or it may be a symbol, such as; we come to a fork in the road. Do we eat with it? Context tells us, because the Bible was not written to us, it was written to a specific people, situation, and culture, yet, it is still God’s Word. In addition, God’s Word was not just written to them, it also is written for us. Therefore, we can easily extract its meaning and make effectual applications for today’s and tomorrow’s Christian living, including cross culturally. Then there are other contexts such as the language and the relevance of the audience. For example, what did it mean to the original hearers and readers? We do this before we come up with an application today, because our application must not contradict the intended meaning. If we do not follow this rule, we can easily make any passage mean whatever we want it to mean, or make it apply to whomever or whatever we desire while disregarding what God has to say!

For example, in Revelation 14:14-20, John is giving us a portrayal of the “Last Days” and the “Second Coming” of Christ our Lord where Christ is the great Director, directing His representatives in the reaping and the harvesting of humanity’s souls. This passage represents the quintessence of how most people, including many Christians, see Revelation. Yes, this is correct to a point; but, it is also so much more. Thus, most commentators miss the main points. It is not just about judgment; it is about how we are called to life too! It is a great hope for the faithful who bear good fruit for Him, and a great fear to the godless who bear rotten fruit (Gen. 19:24; Psalm 112:10; Joel 3:12-16; Dan. 7:13-14; Matt. 13:36-43; 24:14; Luke 3:17; John 15:1-8; Gal. 5; Rev. 1:13).

Thus, many commentators come to this passage and see this as just the horrific, ultimate judgment of the wicked while Christ gathers His saints to safety. The Son of Man is seen as Christ Himself and His Second Coming, of His judging the wicked. They see no problem with the angel giving commands to Christ, as it is a message of the Father to the Son. The sickle represents God’s love and the gathering of the faithful as they are separated from the unfaithful. Some see this happening after the rapture and these as the Christians who are saved post-rapture (a pre-tribulation view), while others hold a view that the rapture takes place (post-tribulation view) when Christ comes—after the tribulation. Some see this as the battle of Armageddon and these as literal images of that battle. In addition, there are lengthy views of this battle and what it means; very speculative, but not essential doctrine. A problem with this view is this: according to the Bible, the battle of Armageddon never takes place; it is only prepared for, “gathered” (Rev. 16:16).

Thus, to get this theory that the battle took place and many of the theories in this camp, you have to take a whole bunch of passages out of their context, string them together, and ignore the context and actual meanings of the words. You would have to create your own word meanings, ignore Jewish culture, and completely disregard the Old Testament, Matthew 24, and the original languages in order to create this view. This is very minor stuff theologically; I am not sure how Christ would feel about that, do you? Perhaps, a look into 2 Peter should cause us to tremble if we dare seek to twist and/or read in our ideas to His Word. Always be careful not to read into the Bible what you want it to say; rather, seek what The Word actually says, even if it goes against your personal thinking!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : hermeneutical rules

Rule 1: Scripture Interprets Scripture.

3 12 2008

The Bible is its own commentary. This means, we ask was that said before? and if so, where and what was the context? We are to interpret the words literally and in their historical sense, unless the “context” or “manner” in which they are used seems to be out of context or a contradiction or dissimilar. An example would be the OT Prophets or Apocryphal language that would indicate symbolic meanings. This does not diminish the meaning; it actually extenuates it when we have the key to the metaphor, and Scripture is always the key to Scripture.

Did you know that a lot of the Book of Revelation is found in Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Isaiah, and not so much in Daniel? Thus, before we come to any eschatological conclusions, we are to make sure the passage about which we are reading or writing is clear and is backed up by other passages of Scripture and that we use these other passages to help us make sense of the meaning. For example: there is a lot of confusion over the mark and 666. Many people see them as the mark of the antichrist tricking people into worshipping the beast or himself. Or, a counterfeit Jewish messiah or a slick false preacher is the “false prophet” mentioned in Rev. 16:13. These images bring all kinds of speculations—from an idol coming to life to a robot, a computer chip implanted in people, or some other technology that God can’t do anything about, while others see this as the rebuilt Temple captivating people. The mark and buying and selling are also seen as the world changing to a cashless society, ripe for corruption and control by the antichrist. One crazy theory after the other appears while no one seems to bother to take a look into the Old Testament such as Ezekiel 9:4-6 that John was quoting and see what these images meant, or look at Deuteronomy 13:1-11; or John Himself telling us what the antichrist is all about in 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; or 2 John 1:7. Not sure? See for yourself on the Bible study in Revelation 13:11-18, http://70030.netministry.com/articles_view.asp?articleid=33585&columnid=3803&contentonly=true

This rule is simple: we use the Bible to see what other parts of the Bible say and this clears it up. What we do not do is come up with a theology by ignoring contexts, word meanings, and other passages. The Bible does not contradict itself; it does bring more light and insight, so use it.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : hermeneutical rules

Next Entries »