Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | mark d seyler | 167224 | ||
Hi Doc, I haven't seen where the ancient writers had much of anything resembling a "universal consensus" of these prophetic Scriptures, and in that way they greatly resemble the scholars of today. :-) Although I daresay that it was not unknown among the early church to undertand part of this as symbols and parts more literally. You ask about apocalyptic exegesis. Do you consider the Revelation to belong to the genre of writing known as Hebrew Apocalyptic, and should be understood as that sort of writing is meant to be understood? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
2 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | DocTrinsograce | 167226 | ||
I'm asking about your statement of the text's inability to yield any other interpretation. Might we remain focused on my original question? | ||||||
3 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | mark d seyler | 167232 | ||
Hi Doc, I am not trying to get off track here. Your original question was: "Are the other things in Revelation 13 understood to be literal, physical things: beasts, dragons, horns, heads, etc.?" In this I understand you to be asking about how to interpret each of the individual elements contained within this chapter. I could answer that, but it would require some time and length of posting to accomplish it. I don't mind doing that, mind you. Much of this I would simply pull from my study notes, to combine with fresh study, as I always like to review complex topics as I write about them. So I asked if there was something in particular. Then you wrote: "On what hermeneutical principle of apocalyptic exegesis does one switch back and forth from literal interpretation to figurative interpretation?" Now, this is different from the original question, of "are these literal or symbols", and has become, "how do you decide it they are literal or symbols?" But you asked a somewhat loaded question, since you are asking about "apocalyptic exegesis". I do not attempt apocalyptic exegesis, since I do not consider the Revelation to be of that genre. So before I try to explain how to peel an orange, I want to make sure you aren't thinking of an apple. I don't do apples. :-) But to try to cut to the center, at least, what I think the center is, I do what the text tells me to do. If John says he saw a sign, then this means something that is indicated by what he saw. If he says he saw something happen, then I expect that what he saw is something that is going to happen. I draw heavily from the Old Testament, especially Genesis, Daniel, and Zechariah, but not only those. I haven't counted myself, but I have been told there are over 800 OT allusions within the Book of the Revelation. I believe the Revelation is meant to do just that - Reveal, not conceal. And if you start interpreting beyond what is specifically allowed by the text, you can make it say whatever you want. But I'm sorry, I tend to ramble (perhaps you've seen this before in me) ;-) So I'm all little confused. Did you wish to know about the literalness of the mark of the beast, or about the dragon, and beasts, and the rest of the chapter, or what do you want me to answer? (if I already haven't) Love in Christ Mark |
||||||
4 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 167247 | ||
Mark: You're saying the book of Revelation is not apocalyptic literature? I have three questions. 1) In Revelation 1:1, what is the Greek word that is translated by the English word "revelation"? 2) What is the etymology of the English word "revelation"? 3) How do you define the word "apocalytpic"? I do not have a definition for it. I barely know how to spell it. But, is there a definition of the word that is different from the dictionary definition? (I really don't know and sincerely want to learn.) Another way to put it is: what are your criteria for determining whether a book of the Bible is of the apocalyptic genre? Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
5 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | mark d seyler | 167266 | ||
Hi John, On your question 1, the Greek word is "apokalupsis", which is from "apokalupto", which means "to take off the cover". To unveil, to reveal. So "apokalupsis" would mean "the unveiling". On you question 2, the following is from the "online etymology dictionary": "c.1303, "disclosure of information to man by a divine or supernatural agency," from O.Fr. revelacion, from L. revelationem (nom. revelatio), from revelatus, pp. of revelare (see reveal). General meaning "disclosure of facts" is attested from c.1375; meaning "striking disclosure" is from 1862. As the name of the last book of the New Testament (Revelation of St. John), it is first attested c.1400 (see apocalypse); as simply Revelations, it is first recorded 1691." Regarding your question 3, I have included the definition above, in 1. Perhaps this will help: There is a body of literature known as Hebrew Apocalyptic. Some examples of this are: Book of Heavenly Luminaries 250 B.C. Ethiopic Enoch circa 175 B.C. Jubilees circa 150 B.C. Testament of Levi 137-107 B.C. Similitudes of Enoch circa 50 B.C. Slavonic Enoch 1-100 C.E. Ezra Apocalypse 100-120 C.E. Syriac Baruch 2 Baruch 100-120 C.E. Testament of Abraham 75-125 C.E. Apocalypse of Abraham 70-150 C.E. These writings are grouped together largely because of their claim to speak of the future, and that they are filled with symbols and obscure references that lack any kind of clear meaning. The name of this genre is a more modern choice, and comes out of secular study of ancient literature. Many will include Zephaniah, Zechariah, Daniel, and the Revelation as a part of this genre. I do not. The writings named above, excluding those of the Biblical Canon, are not inspired Scripture, therefore, are not to be considered in the same way as inspired Scripture. So to answer your question, there are a number of different opinions regarding understanding Hebrew Apocalyptic Literature. Some will try to apply those ideas to the inspired prophetic writings in the Bible. I do not believe that is proper, and I apply the same rules to prophetic passages as I do to non-prophetic passages. What may perhaps be my primary disagreement with those who want to lump these together is that they will go on to say that you can't understand the Biblical prophetic writings any more than you can understand any of the Hebrew Apocalyptic. God put these prophetic passages in the Bible to give information by His Spirit to His children, not to hide it from them, and so I believe that they can in fact be understood, by diligent study, by prayer, by the revelatory work of the Holy Spirit. Does this help? Let me know if you have any other questions. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
6 | Mark of the Beast | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 167271 | ||
Mark: Thanks for the clear and factual information. It is very helpful. Now I understand the terms you used and what you meant in your posts. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||