Search results

The problem there is that for about 1400 years, there are no Christian historians that aren't Catholic. Your alternative is only Islamic historians, which doesn't seem better to me.

Like I said to Rich earlier... there aren't actually any people who are 100% literal OR 100% allegorical. We all are degrees of both. The main thing, I think, is not to VOID the literal meaning in order to assign an allegorical one. And vice versa - just because something is literal doesn't...

I'd wonder what they meant. Here in this topic, you and I seem to have different definitions of allegorical. I think it's fine to apply Scripture to our lives, even out of context, as long as we don't strip passages of their original meaning. We can find moral lessons there to use (i.e...

I'm familiar with historical-grammatical. I don't remember the word literal being prefixed to it, but... the quote describes it as I remember. Nonetheless, I've run into a number of people over the years who like to back up their interpretations of Scripture by shouting the word LITERAL...

Well, you said that reading anything about the church into the Old Testament was eisegesis. But the New Testament does that. It talks about Abraham becoming "a father of nations" and interprets that to be about the adoption of the Gentiles. I don't think that's eisegesis... but I do think...

But the New Testament has a bunch of examples of exactly that... was Paul an eisegete? Matthew? Peter?

I can think of a couple if you'd like... lfh I don't see that. I see a few places in the Bible that "earth" and "heaven" are used as metaphors for "the people of Israel" and "the government of Israel." But not in the gospels... they aren't poetic books. Replaced? No. Israel is a tree that...

You've created a differentiation... that doesn't matter. Everyone, whether a scholar or not, uses NEITHER a completely literal nor completely allegorical approach. It's fine to use a general rule, but like the pirate captain said... the rules are more like guidelines. When you have multiple...

No... that isn't well-agreed on. There are no scholars today that hold a fully allegorical interpretation of Scripture. There are also no scholars today that hold a fully literal interpretation. We all do our best to figure out which bits have meaning beyond the surface level. There are a...

Certainly possible... I didn't exactly memorize it... but I don't remember that. Any chance you have a reference? From what I remember, Enoch is actually... several books... and rather long. I don't know if I wanna read the whole thing again. :sweatsmile: They definitely did. The...

I've heard these theories before... and I don't think that I buy into the idea that the spirits of the Nephilim hung around and became what we think of as demons. I don't find that in the Bible. I don't find that in Enoch, either. I've read Enoch several times. I do find that a few "giants"...

They're about 4 years late to the party. The Roman Praetorian guard deposed emperors when their abuses became excessive, or their mental faculties were in doubt. Is it too much to wish that our secret service could take the same initiative?

Yes, but the immediate follow-up question is "what are demons?" Some think they are fallen angels, while others will say they are things like alcoholism. I believe in both, but I have questions. Like, I'm not completely sure if demons can have a physical body of their own? And does...

Nothing can force any conclusion when Revelation is so nebulous, but... Throughout the Bible, kingdoms and their kings are synonymous. When the prophets write, they use them interchangeably. If you're putting a difference between them... well, the Bible doesn't.

Uh... doesn't exist? As far as I know, the Bible doesn't use plain language to talk about this. We only have the bits in Revelation, and they are not easy to understand. Like, how literal is any bit of Revelation? It's open for any number of interpretations Well, you seem to have some...

That's how I grew up understanding it, too. I don't any more. But sometimes I wish I still could... it certainly has appeal.

Yes, this. Demonizing seems to happen when a person (or group) latches onto some form of sinning and makes it their identity. They do it to themself. They hold onto the demon as much as it holds onto them.

That's IS a problem for amils, but not a fatal one. It basically forces them (us?) to go identify some historical person as the false prophet and/or beast. And perhaps to provide some explanation of the mark. There are a number of competing theories. Wanna hear a few? The cult of Mithras...

For fortune-telling? I agree. However, Tarot are also an art-form. There's an art-style (perhaps several) based on them... they originate from Italy during a period known for its art. It's fairly common for artists even today to create a set of drawings/painting giving their own take on...

You're definitely familiar with these verses: For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel...