Why
"Normal" Interpretation is the Keyto Understanding Prophetic & Apocalyptic Passages
Return to "The Bible: One Bite at a Time"
Why
"Normal" Interpretation is the Key
to Understanding Prophetic & Apocalyptic
Passages
Having
& Using the Right Tools!
Sermon Tape # 54,
Sunday December 10, 2000
(see suggested reading list & related sermons
at:
http://www.soulcare.org/articles_bible_exposition.htm )
Review of foundational articles on prophecy & eschatology:
Biblical Prophecy: A Jigsaw Puzzle with Pieces Throughout the Bible
(Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, Mat 24, 2 Th 2)
For a much more detailed discussion and analysis of the process of interpretation (hermeneutics), especially "literal" vs. "allegorical", please see the following recommended resources:
Pentecost, Dwight. Things To Come: A Study in Bible Eschatology, pp. 1-64.
Dr. Pentecost's analysis is very technical, but extremely helpful in demonstrating the many misunderstandings some people have about the "normal", "literal" method of interpretation.
Ice and Demy. The Truth About The Rapture, pp. 13-18.
Drs. Ice and Demy provide a very simple, yet not simplistic, explanation of the primary issues involved in the debate. In addition, they present the "macroliteral" method in plain, non-technical language.
** There is simply no way to avoid some of the
technical discussions contained in this message, folks. So please bear
with it and don't tune out. Remember, nothing is more
worthy of your diligence than our Father's Word (almost 30 % of which is
prophetic). Building anything worthwhile requires hard
work, having the right tools, and knowing how to use those tools!
For example, the multi-tool pictured at the left could be used to reduce my nose hairs, and the older I get, the more that needs to be done. But, how I use the tool will make a big difference when I'm done. I could use the little scissors to trim the nose hairs, or I could use the pliers to grab a bunch and rip them out. See what I mean. So please, study the tools below well, memorize them, and practice until you become skilled in using them.
Our Sample Subject & Texts As We Compare Allegorical vs. Literal Methods:
"Israel" - See below, the review of "The Church is not Israel".
The term, "Israel", is used 2579 times in the Bible. It is consistently used to refer to a real person, Jacob, or a real, physical nation, Israel. Also, next week we'll apply these principles to Daniel 9 and his prophecy of 70 weeks. The first 69 weeks of years were fulfilled literally in an amazingly accurate manner. Therefore it is only reasonable to interpret the 70th week as literal. In fact, many of the OT prophetic pictures and figures of speech are directly explained by the prophet, and these pictures with their direct meanings are later picked up and reused by the NT authors, especially John in the Revelation.
A Review of The Process of Prophecy Puzzle Building:
By "jigsaw puzzle"
I do not condone the common error of merely gathering proof texts out of context
and cramming them into a preconceived framework. To do it properly, each
piece, whether it be a word, sentence, or paragraph must be prayerfully and
carefully studied in its full context.
1. First, you gather and lay out all of your pieces.
(For example, Gen 3:15; 12; 15; Isa-Zech; Mat 24; 2 Th 2; Revelation, etc.)
2. Second, you set in order the outline and corner pieces, found in every puzzle.
(The normal, literal, grammatical-historical and contextual method of interpretation)
3. Third, you group together pieces with similar content (all the blues, or dark greens, etc.).
(Messianic prophecies, references to 3.5 years/42 months/1260 days, Anti-Christ's titles, etc.)
4. Fourth, you methodically put the puzzle together, piece by piece, and section by section.
(Systematic exegesis seeking to fit all pieces into a coherent, consistent picture)
5. Fifth, eventually you will end up with a few difficult pieces that at first don't seem to easily fit into your general scheme. So you have to examine those pieces from different perspectives. Sometimes you will discover that by just looking at it from a little different angle it perfectly and beautifully fits into a spot you didn't even see before.
(Isaiah 61:1-3 split between Jesus' first and His second comings, in light of Luke 4:18-19.)
6. Finally, if you end up with your puzzle looking kind of buckled up and bent, with some extra pieces that absolutely will not fit anywhere, then you need to seriously consider that you've been forcing a lot of pieces together.
(Eisegesis, like claiming Mat 24:21-22 and all of Revelation were fulfilled before AD 70 ..........)
A Review of the Four Views & Their Method of Interpretation:
Past (Preterist) - Non-systematically literal interpretation.
Present (Historicist) - Allegorical interpretation.
No Time (Mythacist) - Allegorical interpretation.
Future (Futurist) - Systematically literal interpretation. (The "normal" method)
Some terms you need to understand first:
Hermeneutics = "The science (skill) of biblical interpretation, which sets forth the laws and principles that lead to the meaning of a scripture text." (Dr. Paul Benware, Professor at Moody Bible Institute, in his book, Understanding End Time Prophecy. Appendix)
Type = "A symbolic foreshadowing of some truth about Christ (usually employing people or events from the Old Testament to prefigure traits or incidents pertaining to the Messiah). For example, Israel's bondage in Egypt was a graphic foretelling of the infant Christ's retreat from Herod (cf. Hos. 11:1; Mat 2:13-15), and the bronze serpent raised on a pole in Numbers 21:9 was also a type representing Christ's crucifixion (John 3:14)." (John MacArthur in, The Second Coming, Appendix)
Exegetical = "Having to do with exegesis, the careful analysis and explanation of a biblical text, especially in the original languages." (John MacArthur in, The Second Coming, Appendix)
Allegorical Interpretation = "A method of interpretation that disregards the historical context of a passage and treats the literal sense of a scripture text as secondary to a deeper, more spiritual meaning." (Dr. Paul Benware, Professor at Moody Bible Institute, in his book, Understanding End Time Prophecy. Appendix)
Allegory in the Bible: The Bible certainly contains allegories, but never do any of the writers of the Bible use allegory to interpret any other part of the Bible itself. This is an often overlooked and sometimes misrepresented fact. Dr. Pentecost surveys the history of interpretation from OT to NT, Jewish to Christian, and on to modern times. There is no justification in the Bible for systematic allegorical interpretation of Scripture. Even Gal 4:21-31, which is often used as a lone proof text by mythacists (idealists), does not sanction the universal application of their method. Paul was merely explains a specific passage regarding the covenant family of Abraham, and the distinction between God's Covenant Way vs. Abraham's fleshly effort to produce an heir through the Egyptian maid, Hagar. (Please see the sermon notes for Genesis 16, Isaac or Ishmael) Paul was not advocating a systematic method of allegorical interpretation for Scripture.
In fact, Dr. Pentecost list a number of dangerous consequences of the allegorical system:
(Things to Come, pp. 5-6)1. "The first great danger of the allegorical method is that it does not interpret Scripture."
2. ". . . a second great danger in the allegorical method: the basic authority in interpretation ceases to be the Scriptures, but the mind of the interpreter."
3. "A third great danger in the allegorical method is that one is left without any means by which the conclusions of the interpreter may be tested."This is how and why the Roman Catholic institution substituted biblical authority for the authority of the men leading their church (Magisterium).
Example of allegorical interpretation: The four rivers of Gen 2 (Pishon, Havilah, Tigris, and Euphrates) are seen as representing the human body, soul, spirit, and mind.
Literal Interpretation = "The grammatical-historical approach to the text of Scripture where the words of the passage are interpreted according to the accepted laws of language." (Dr. Paul Benware, Professor at Moody Bible Institute, in his book, Understanding End Time Prophecy. Appendix)
Dr. Elliot Johnson, in Expository Hermeneutics: An Introduction (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990, p. 9), points out that many people fail to distinguish between two uses of the term "literal".
1. "the clear, plain sense of a word or phrase as over against a figurative use . . ."
2. "a system that views the text as providing the basis of the true interpretation."
(systematic literalism, simply using the grammatical-historical method of interpretation)Systematic literalism (macroliteralism) was rediscovered by the reformers in their efforts to counter Roman Catholicism's allegorical interpretations which lead to serious errors in theology. Today, those who use systematic literalism do disagree over whether certain verses or passages are figures of speech (connotative) or denotative in usage. But there is far more agreement among literalist as they interpret the same passages, than there is among those using the allegorical approach. Allegorical interpretation becomes every mans guess.
"The dictionary defines literal as "belonging to letters". Further, it says literal interpretation involves an approach "based on the actual words in their ordinary meaning . . . not going beyond the facts." "Literal interpretation of the Bible simply means to explain the original sense of the Bible according to the normal and customary usages of its language." How is this done? It can only be accomplished through an interpretation of the written text which includes consideration of the grammatical (according to the rules of grammar), historical (consistent with the historical setting of the passage), contextual (in accord with its context) method of interpretation. This is what literalists mean by consistently literal interpretation.
(The Truth About the Rapture, by Dr. Thomas Ice and Dr. Timothy Demy, p.13).Examples of systematic literalism: The term Israel consistently refers to the literal, physical person, Jacob, and/or the nation that arose from him, and not the church.
Figures of Speech = "Literal interpretation recognizes that
a word or phrase can be used either plainly (denotative) or figuratively
(connotative). As in our own conversations today, the Bible may use plain
speech, such as 'He died yesterday' (denotative use of language). Or the
same thing may be said in a more colorful way: 'He kicked the bucket yesterday'
(connotative use of language). An important point to be noted is that even
though we may use a figure of speech to refer to someone's death, we are using
that figure to refer to an event that literally happened."
(The Truth About the Rapture, by Dr. Thomas Ice and Dr. Timothy Demy,
pp. 16)
But folks, please note that "kicked the bucket" could mean something very different if the context demands it. For example, if I said, "Farmer Brown was milking his cow and when he stood up to leave, he kicked the bucket and spilled all of the milk". In this example the phrase, "kicked the bucket" is denotative and should be interpreted in a microliteral manner.
The following quotes help to further clarify this issue:
"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicated clearly otherwise." (David L. Cooper, The World's Greatest Library: Graphically Illustrated. pp. 11)
"Literalists understand that a figure of speech is employed by Isaiah teaching that the Adamic curse upon nature will be reversed in the millennium when he says, 'And all the trees of the field will clap their hands' (Isa 55:12). This figure is discerned by specific factors in the context in which it was written, all dealing with the removal of the curse upon nature at this future time. Even though figurative language is employed, it will literally happen in history." (The Truth About the Rapture, by Dr. Thomas Ice and Dr. Timothy Demy, pp. 16)
* A figurative (symbolic) use of language does not require or justify a "spiritualist" (allegorical) interpretive methodology. Figures of speech in the Bible simply portray real, historical (both past history as well as future history) events through colorful and often graphic descriptions for emphasis.
At the other extreme from a spiritualist method, is the misuse of microliteralism. Here's a example that shows how even "microliteralism" can misinterpret the simple meaning of Scripture. Catholicism in most instances uses a systematically allegorical method of interpretation. But in John 6, Roman Catholicism misuses "microliteralism" where Jesus says that we must eat His body and drink His blood to be saved. Catholicism misunderstands Jesus' figurative use of language and ends up with the false doctrine of "transubstantiation". But the context of John 1-7 reveals the need to interpret these sayings figuratively.
Nicodemus (John 3) misunderstood Jesus by interpreting His words microliterally and mistakenly thought Jesus meant he'd have to reenter his mother's womb. Then the woman at the well (John 4) misunderstood Jesus by thinking He was talking about real water. And those listening to Jesus in John 6 misinterpreted Jesus' words about consuming His body and blood. Remember, in John 16:25, Jesus plainly said: "These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father."
But even though Jesus was then speaking figurative, please note that He was referring to a real need for a real birth, and for a real thirst to be quenched. Even more important, is the the fact that the context of John explains his figures of speech very clearly. In John 3 Jesus says the new birth must be from above, and by the Spirit of God. In John 6 and 7:37-39, Scripture directly explains that Jesus figurative use of "water" in this context referred to the Holy Spirit.
Reviewing the Futurist perspective:
The futurist view
believes that Revelation and parallel prophetic passages primarily refer to future
events beyond our current day. It is a natural outgrowth
of using the normal method of interpretation for all written
human language. The text is interpreted with the basic historical,
grammatical approach, accepting the author's statements at face value.
The assumption is that the author of the book says what he means, and means
what he says.
Therefore, the statements are seen to be literal, unless the context forces a symbolic interpretation. Even then, the symbols represent real events, real people, and real nations in the real world, plainly laid out in real time frames of real chronological order.
This normal
method of interpretation is able to take the many prophecy puzzle pieces from
throughout the Bible and put them together in a coherent and obvious
chronological order. The result is a beautiful picture of
His-story. It is the story of our awesome and sovereign God, who proves
His authorship of His Word by proclaiming the future and then bringing it to
pass (Isaiah 41-48).
Futurists believe Revelation and other last days prophecies
across Scripture are written to convict, guide, and encourage primarily
Israeli Jews during the tribulation, who will believe in Jesus as the Messiah
of Israel and the World. They recognize that many Gentiles during the
Tribulation will also come to believe that Jesus is Messiah. Futurists,
therefore, see a clear distinction between national, ethnic Israel, and the
Church which is the Bride and Body of Christ.
Next week, we'll examine the main corner piece of the whole prophecy puzzle, the 70 weeks of Daniel 9. The first 69 of the 70 weeks of years have already been fulfilled in an amazingly literal manner regarding Jesus' first coming, and this fact is accepted by scholars from each eschatological camp. Given this, the only normal, consistent interpretation for the 70th week of Daniel is that it also will be fulfilled in an historically literal manner. And as we will see in our unfolding study of the prophecy, the majority of the Revelation is referring to Daniel's 70th week, the time of "Jacob's Trouble".
Systematic literalism forms the cornerstone of the foundation of a Futurist (Premillennial) view of eschatology. Three more foundation stones compose the rest of that foundation. Each one leads to the logical acceptance of the next in the systematic process of developing a coherent, theology of last things.
1. Consistent macroliteral interpretation.
2. Distinction between Israel and the Church.
3. Futurism
4. Premillennialism
A review of the three
biblical categories of evidence proving that the Church is NOT Israel.
* A systematically literal method of interpretation
(the "normal" grammatical-historical method) logically demands the
acceptance of this biblical fact.
1. Different Beginnings: The Church is a "mystery", not revealed in the OT, and it had a unique beginning as an entity distinct from Israel:
- Israel began with the call of Abram in Gen 12, when God promised to make a great nation from his genes. The rest of the OT records the historical development of that physically ethnic, geographic nation.
- The Church is never mentioned in the OT, because the NT says it was a "mystery" (Eph 3:3-6; Col 1:26), which God did not reveal until its distinct beginning at Pentecost (Acts 2). It is a new spiritual entity, composed of regenerated, believing Jews and Gentiles (John 7:37-39; Acts 11).
- Jesus in Mat 16:18 used the future tense when He said, "I will build My church.".
(see also Acts 1:5)
- Jesus is the head of the church and did not assume that role until He ascended into heaven (Eph 1:20-23; Col 1:18).
- The Church did not begin until the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit (John 7:37-39; 1 Cor 12:13). Members of the Church are baptized into the Body of Christ.
- Many specific prophecies in the OT regarding the physical nation and land of Israel have yet to be completely fulfilled, such as Ezek 36-40 (especially 39:29-40:1ff).
2. Contrasted Consistently: The Church in the NT is consistently contrasted as distinct from Israel, and the two names are never used interchangeably:
- 1 Cor 10:32 lists three distinct groups: Jews, Greeks, and the Church of God. Even after the Church is in existence, ethnic Israelites are still seen as distinct from Gentiles, and the Church. The Church is a unique mystery composed of both Jews and Gentiles. (These same three groups are delineated in Eph 2:11-16.
- Throughout Acts (Israel 20xs and Ekklesia 19xs), the two terms are always used in contrast to one another and never interchangeably.
- In the entire NT, "Israel" is used 73xs, and it always refers to ethnic, national Israel.
Only three of the 73 are claimed by replacement theologians as representing the "church" (Rom 9:6; 11:26; Gal 6:16). And two of these three (Rom 9:6; 11:26) are even seen by many replacement theologians as referring to ethnic Israel.
- Only Gal 6:16 is used by all replacement theologians as their proof text to say that the Church is now Israel. Gal 6:16 "And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God." The key to interpreting Gal 6:16 is the meaning and use of the Greek term for "and" in this verse, "them, and the Israel of God". Replacement theologians set aside the primary meaning of "and" and substitute the word "even". The verse then reads, "even the Israel of God". Everyone agrees that the term "them" refers to members of the Church, but the simple, normal use of "and", as well as the context of Galatians, indicates a contrast between "them" and a different group called "the Israel of God". Yet replacement theologians must assume an abnormal use of "and" in this verse in order to make "them" and "Israel of God" become synonyms for the same group, the Church.
- "Israel of God" in Gal 6:16, according to a normal interpretation, simply refers to the believing Jews. 1 Cor 10:18 in contrast refers to unbelieving Jews ("Israel after the flesh").
- Another verse important to the discussion is Gal 3:229, "And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.". What does "Abraham's seed" mean? Note that the specific term Israel is not used here. The phrase "Abraham's seed" is used in Scripture for a number of meanings: physical descendants, believing Jews, believing Gentiles. Yet the Church is never called "Israel", nor is it even said to fulfill the land promises of the covenant. The land covenant will only be filled in the millennial kingdom, after the fullness of the Gentiles (Luk 21:24).(Rom 11:25-27) 25For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
"The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins."
3. Purposeful Tribulation: The stated purpose of the tribulation is for national, ethnic Israel, not the NT Church:
- Jer 30:7 "Alas! For that day is great, to that none is like it; And it is the time of Jacob’s trouble, But he shall be saved out of it."
(Deu 4:30; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 20:37; 36:25-36; 37-40; Dan 9:24-27; 12:1; Zech 13:8-9; Mal 4:4-6; Mat 24:15-20; Rom 11:25-28; Rev 7:4-14)
- The tribulation (Seven years of judgment comprising the 70th week of Daniel's prophecy in Dan 9) is sovereignly designed for the purpose of bringing Jacob's descendants, Israel as a corporate nation, to repentance and faith in the Messiah whom they pierced, Jesus:Zech 12:1-3 1"The burden of the word of the Lord against Israel. Thus says the Lord, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him: 2"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples, when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. 3"And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it."
Zech 12:10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn."
- Mat 24:21-22 Jesus says the tribulation of Jacob will be a time worse than any other time, both past and present. This could not refer to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, since the Jews experienced even worse persecution by Hitler and Stalin.
- The Church is not mentioned in the Revelation after chapter 3. From then on in the Revelation the focus is solely on national Israel.
Return to articles from "The Bible: One Bite at a Time" -
(Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, Mat 24, 2 Th 2)