Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [revelation-list] Re: Trumpets

Expand Messages
  • Ian Paul
    ... I am wondering why this has to be either/or? There is here a metaphorical surplus of meaning (Ricoeur) which need not invalidate reading in historical
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      >The whole book is said to be a prophecy (1:3,22:19). And I think we
      >agree there is much symbolism. So I am wondering if the message to
      >the seven churches is actually meant for the seven literal historical
      >churches in Asia, or it that part of the symbolism to be
      >interpreted?

      I am wondering why this has to be either/or? There is here a metaphorical
      'surplus of meaning' (Ricoeur) which need not invalidate reading in
      historical context. Beware false dichotomies...

      > After every church message is the call "He who has an
      >ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." This is a
      >phrase usually associated with "spiritual" interpretation. Mat
      >11:14-15, 13:13,43 15:10, 17:12, Mark 4:3,23,24, 7:16, Luke 8:18,
      >John 2:21, 12:40

      Not sure what you mean by 'spiritual'. Are you reading back in a mediaeval
      hermeneutic?
      >
      >As you point out, we haven't discussed whether we should consider the
      >events in Revelation as something that is fulfilled in the first
      >century, something fulfilled in later history, something still to be
      >fulfilled in our future, or some combination of these things. Or it
      >could be that it is none of these things, but some kind of idealistic
      >story or message.

      You are alluding here to the classic four-fold differentiation of supposed
      'approaches' to Revelation (viz preterist, church historical, futurist,
      idealist). The key thing here is that these are actually hermeneutical
      conclusions from the text, rather than methodological presuppositions, as
      they are often presented as.

      Ian Paul
    • Alan Fuller
      ... metaphorical ... I suppose you re right about that. ... mediaeval hermeneutic?
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        >>
        > I am wondering why this has to be either/or? There is here a
        metaphorical
        > 'surplus of meaning' (Ricoeur) which need not invalidate reading in
        > historical context. Beware false dichotomies...<<

        I suppose you're right about that.

        >> Not sure what you mean by 'spiritual'. Are you reading back in a
        mediaeval hermeneutic?<<

        I was trying to explain what I meant by 'spiritual' with the
        references I gave to the gospels. Often when Jesus taught in
        parables or parabolic sayings He would say "He that hath ears to
        hear, let him hear." This is very similar to what it says after each
        message to the churches. To me that might indicate that the mesaage
        to the churches is something like a parable.

        Another example that comes to mind is the incident where Jesus told
        Nicodemus "you must be born again." Jesus was not talking about a
        physical re-birth, but a spiritual one. That's why I chose the
        word 'spiritual'. Another example that comes to mind is where the
        Jews accused Jesus of saying that He would destroy the temple, and
        build it up again in three days. What is the best word to describe
        that type of thing, parabolic, figurative, allegorical, metaphoric?
        I chose the word spiritual. I am using the word 'spiritual' as
        opposed to 'literal'.

        So since there is the part about "He who has an ear, let him hear
        what the Spirit says to the churches," and there are symbols like
        lampstands, etc., I think the churches, as well as the rest of the
        book could be understood as metaphor or allegory. Then again maybe
        it's a more literal description of things. And maybe there's a
        possibility of both. I'm the student here :)

        What do you call methodological presuppositions? You mean whether it
        was written as a literal description of events far in the future, or
        perhaps things in the very near future, or even about current events
        or some combination of those things.

        You are saying that those things can be determined from the text
        itself?

        Alan


        >
        > > After every church message is the call "He who has an
        > >ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." This is
        a
        > >phrase usually associated with "spiritual" interpretation. Mat
        > >11:14-15, 13:13,43 15:10, 17:12, Mark 4:3,23,24, 7:16, Luke 8:18,
        > >John 2:21, 12:40
        >
        > >
        > >As you point out, we haven't discussed whether we should consider
        the
        > >events in Revelation as something that is fulfilled in the first
        > >century, something fulfilled in later history, something still to
        be
        > >fulfilled in our future, or some combination of these things. Or
        it
        > >could be that it is none of these things, but some kind of
        idealistic
        > >story or message.
        >
        > You are alluding here to the classic four-fold differentiation of
        supposed
        > 'approaches' to Revelation (viz preterist, church historical,
        futurist,
        > idealist). The key thing here is that these are actually
        hermeneutical
        > conclusions from the text, rather than methodological
        presuppositions, as
        > they are often presented as.
        >
        > Ian Paul
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.