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

RE: [revelation-list] Ezekiel

Expand Messages
  • Ed Garcia
    I do believe that the Apocalypse was of value to John s contemporaries but I also believe that being prophecy there are predictive sections that have yet to
    Message 1 of 15 , Apr 24, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Message
      I do believe that the Apocalypse was of value to John's contemporaries but I also believe that being prophecy there are predictive sections that have yet to come to pass. I do not believe that it is wholly one or the other. Concerning EN TACHEI, I will point out that the word the word for "quickly" appears in several places in Revelation. Consider especially 22:12 and 22:20 which speak of Jesus coming quickly - here the wording for "coming quickly" is ERCHOMAI TACHU - if I remember correctly.
       
      Ed Garcia
      Kansa
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Edgar Krentz [mailto:ekrentz@...]
      Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 8:59 AM
      To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Ezekiel

      At 3:48 PM -0500 4/23/03, Don K wrote:
      I personally have no problem with the idea that John was envisioning real events, in imagery of course. My problem is that when we extrapolate the Apocalypse into the distant future, from John, or for that matter from us, we are violating the temporal parameters established by the One who gave the revelation to the visionary.
      While it is somewhat customary to either ignore the time indicators of the book, or to mitigate them into virtual meaninglessness, it strikes me that it is a wiser course of action to seek the true meaning of the apocalypsis within the sitz em leben of John's first century world.
      In my book Who Is This Babylon? I spend considerable time examining the various attempts to mitigate these chronological issues.
      Don K.

      I agree with what Don just wrote above. Rev. itself says it is about what will happen EN TACHEI, that is, "quickly." By no stretch of language can that be made to apply to events two millenia later!

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Joel and Rachel Wilhelm
      To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 12:58 PM
      Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Ezekiel

      Prof. Krentz and list,
       
      I am afraid I will cause you to withdraw your view of my post as 'sensible.' I agree that John wrote to his day and age and that the letter has ramifications for then. But what I was indicating is that Ezekiel in a supernatural way visited Jerusalem in his own time and saw actual people. Could not John also see future people and events in the Spirit? Why do we a priori rule out that someone in the past could see a very real future?
       
      J. M. Wilhelm
       
       

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Edgar Krentz
      To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:49 AM
      Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Ezekiel

      At 3:20 PM -0700 4/15/03, Joel and Rachel Wilhelm wrote:
      I noticed something in Ezekiel that I think has ramifications for the interpretation of Revelation. In Ezekiel 8 in particular the prophet sees a manlike being--with similarities to the exalted Christ in Revelation--and the Spirit brings him in visions to Jerusalem. What he then sees are actual events going on in his present, not merely symbolic views of ages to come. I wonder if the experience of Ezekiel sheds light on the book of Revelation and John's experience? Ezekiel saw real people, individuals, acting in time, not mere symbolic entitities. I wonder if the default in examing John's own visions should be the template of Ezekiel, meaning that John is describing individuals and events that are concrete, not idealistic concepts?

       
      J.M. Wilhelm

      This is one of the most sensible submissions to this list in some time. It also correlates well with the nature of apocalyptic--and John was writing a message to first century residents  of the province of Asia, not 21st century Christians. We need to with the Apocalypse what we do with Paul, read other people's correspondence to see if there is a message for us that can be inferred.
      --
      ****************************************************************
      Edgar Krentz
      Christ Seminary--Seminex Professor of New Testament, Emeritus
      Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
      1100 East 55th Street, Chicago, IL 60615
      Tel: 773-256-0773; home phone 773-947-8105
      Office e-mail: ekrentz@...
      home e-mail: ekrentz@...
      ------------------------------------------------------------
      GERASKO D' AEI POLLA DIDASKOMENOS
      "I grow old, constantly learning many things." [Solon of Athens]
      ***************************************************************


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      -- 
      
      ****************************************************************
      Edgar Krentz
      Christ Seminary--Seminex Professor of New Testament, Emeritus
      Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
      1100 East 55th Street, Chicago, IL 60615
      Tel: 773-256-0773; home phone 773-947-8105
      Office e-mail: ekrentz@...
      home e-mail: ekrentz@...
      ------------------------------------------------------------
      GERASKO D' AEI POLLA DIDASKOMENOS
      "I grow old, constantly learning many things." [Solon of Athens]
      ***************************************************************


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Reidar Kristiansen
      The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also could be from the past. Reidar Kristiansen rki@start.no ... Få din egen
      Message 2 of 15 , Apr 24, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also
        could be from the past.


        Reidar Kristiansen
        rki@...

        ------------------------------------------------------------
        Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/
      • Reidar Kristiansen
        The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also could be from the past. Reidar Kristiansen rki@start.no ... Få din egen
        Message 3 of 15 , Apr 24, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also
          could be from the past.


          Reidar Kristiansen
          rki@...

          ------------------------------------------------------------
          Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/
        • Reidar Kristiansen
          The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also could be from the past. Reidar Kristiansen rki@start.no ... Få din egen
          Message 4 of 15 , Apr 24, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also
            could be from the past.


            Reidar Kristiansen
            rki@...

            ------------------------------------------------------------
            Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/


            ------------------------------------------------------------
            Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/
          • Reidar Kristiansen
            The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also could be from the past. Reidar Kristiansen rki@start.no ... Få din egen
            Message 5 of 15 , Apr 24, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              The vision is from him who is,was and is to come,therefore the imagery also
              could be from the past.


              Reidar Kristiansen
              rki@...

              ------------------------------------------------------------
              Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/


              ------------------------------------------------------------
              Få din egen @...-adresse gratis på http://www.start.no/
            • Don K
              Alan, I have been out of pocket, in Texas, for several days. My apologies for the delay. Further, I am preparing for a seminar in North Carolina, with four
              Message 6 of 15 , Apr 28, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Alan, I have been out of pocket, in Texas, for several days. My apologies
                for the delay. Further, I am preparing for a seminar in North Carolina, with
                four major speeches, and will not be able to respond to anything for a bit.
                Hopefully, my thoughts below will also cover some of the inquiries from Ed
                Garcia, and perhaps, to an extent, by George as well.

                In regards to your question, we know that the words mean that the events
                were near, and to occur soon by the normal means of communication and
                hermeneutic.
                By observing the normal, common (koine) meaning and usage of the words.
                By observing the context of their usage.
                By the lexical aids.
                It has always struck me as a bit strange that when we observe the use of
                mello, tachos, engus, and even en taxei, with their cognates, in
                non-eschatological contexts, that there is virtually no debate about the
                temporal imminence indicated by these terms. We seldom if ever hear anyone
                argue, for instance, that when the Jews passover was at hand (engus), or
                when "the time of the fruit drew near" (engizo, Mt. 21:34), this did not
                mean a temporal imminence. Examples could be multiplied. The point is that
                these are temporal expressions. (Engus of course also expresses spatial
                proximity, but the idea of nearness is still to the fore.)
                There is another element here, that I see virtually ignored in the
                literature, and that is the temporal contrasts.
                We often find expressions that prophetic events were far off (Numbers
                24:17f; Hebrews 11:13-16), and not near (Daniel 8:26; 12:4). The New
                Testament writers say that the Old Covenant prophets were told that the last
                days events they were foretelling were not for their times. However, the New
                Covenant prophets were told, and said that what the Old prophets anticipated
                was being fulfilled and was about to be consummated (1 Peter 1:10f). In
                Revelation, for instance, the Danielic predictions serve as the blueprint of
                the consummative events being foretold by John. What Daniel was told was not
                near--and thus he was instructed to seal the book-- was now so near in
                John's day that John was told not to seal the book. I do not find anywhere
                in the Apocalypse that John communicated the idea that the events he was
                foretelling were not near.
                If we can argue that "at hand" does not mean near, what will we argue that
                "not at hand" means? If quickly does not mean soon, then does "not near"
                mean it could happen very soon?
                These are but a few of the reasons why I disagree with the posit that the
                chronological indicators of Revelation are not all that important. The book
                is rife with indications that its fulfillment was near. The book is
                bracketed with warnings of the imminent consummation, and calls for ethical
                conduct in light of that soon coming climax. There is more on this than I
                have time to develop, but this issue alone emphasizes my point well, I
                think.
                Well, I have gone on long enough.
                Thanks for your thoughts and inquiry,
                Don K. Preston

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Alan Fuller" <rocsy@...>
                To: <revelation-list@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 11:48 AM
                Subject: [revelation-list] Re: Ezekiel


                >
                > Don K.,
                >
                > You write:
                > >>My problem is that when we extrapolate the Apocalypse into the
                > distant future, from John, or for that matter from us, we are
                > violating the temporal parameters established by the One who gave the
                > revelation to the visionary.
                > While it is somewhat customary to either ignore the time indicators
                > of the book, or to mitigate them into virtual meaninglessness, it
                > strikes me that it is a wiser course of action to seek the true
                > meaning of the apocalypsis within the sitz em leben of John's first
                > century world.<<
                >
                > I assume you mean "soon" and "quickly," as Edgar pointed out. What
                > meaning do these words have in the first century world, and what do
                > we base our understanding on?
                >
                > What method of interpretation was used to understand these things in
                > the first century world?
                >
                > Thanks,
                > Alan F.
                > Texas
                >
                >
                > --- In revelation-list@yahoogroups.com, "Don K" <dkpret@b...> wrote:
                > > Re: [revelation-list] EzekielI personally have no problem with the
                > idea that John was envisioning real events, in imagery of course. My
                > problem
                >
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
              • Alan Fuller
                Don, Thank you for taking time to make an excellent response to my post. It doesn t seem strange to me to view the mentioned words in a normal way in
                Message 7 of 15 , Apr 30, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Don,

                  Thank you for taking time to make an excellent response to my post.

                  It doesn't seem strange to me to view the mentioned words in a normal
                  way in non-eschatological contexts, but view them in another way in
                  eschatalogical terms. Then again, when we use similar words today
                  we're usually not, if ever, referring to a span of several years.
                  whether a span of several years should be considered more temporal in
                  regards to prophecy than several thousand I'm not sure. I think the
                  context they're used in is the most important thing in eschatalogical
                  terms.

                  I think we can also find expressions in the OT that make prophetic
                  events sound near (Isa 46:13 51:5 61:11, compare Ro 1:17 3:21-26 10:3-
                  15 ).

                  I think we do well to look at Daniel in relation to the "end times."
                  We are told several times that the vision in Daniel eight is for the
                  end times (8:17 19 26). So if we accept the traditional meaning and
                  interpretation of Daniel eight the end times started about 550 BC.
                  That's about the same time that Daniel eight claims to be written.
                  That doesn't seem like many days to me.

                  Daniel 12:4 asserts that the last vision of Daniel won't be
                  understood until the end. Is it understood? If so when was the end
                  where it became understood? Also, if it is understood I would like
                  for the ones who understand it to give me a better explanation so
                  that I might understand all of it myself.

                  The questions you ask about "near" and "at hand" deserve a closer
                  look. But I'm not yet convinced the words mean anything at all in
                  and eschatological context. Not yet anyway, but I look forward to
                  futher discussions.

                  Again, thank you for your time.

                  Alan F.

                  --- In revelation-list@yahoogroups.com, "Don K" <dkpret@b...> wrote:
                  > Alan, I have been out of pocket, in Texas, for several days. My
                  apologies
                  > for the delay. Further, I am preparing for a seminar in North
                  Carolina, with
                  > four major speeches, and will not be able to respond to anything
                  for a bit.
                  > Hopefully, my thoughts below will also cover some of the inquiries
                  from Ed
                  > Garcia, and perhaps, to an extent, by George as well.
                  >
                  > In regards to your question, we know that the words mean that the
                  events
                  > were near, and to occur soon by the normal means of communication
                  and
                  > hermeneutic.
                  > By observing the normal, common (koine) meaning and usage of the
                  words.
                  > By observing the context of their usage.
                  > By the lexical aids.
                  > It has always struck me as a bit strange that when we observe the
                  use of
                  > mello, tachos, engus, and even en taxei, with their cognates, in
                  > non-eschatological contexts, that there is virtually no debate
                  about the
                  > temporal imminence indicated by these terms. We seldom if ever hear
                  anyone
                  > argue, for instance, that when the Jews passover was at hand
                  (engus), or
                  > when "the time of the fruit drew near" (engizo, Mt. 21:34), this
                  did not
                  > mean a temporal imminence. Examples could be multiplied. The point
                  is that
                  > these are temporal expressions. (Engus of course also expresses
                  spatial
                  > proximity, but the idea of nearness is still to the fore.)
                  > There is another element here, that I see virtually ignored in the
                  > literature, and that is the temporal contrasts.
                  > We often find expressions that prophetic events were far off
                  (Numbers
                  > 24:17f; Hebrews 11:13-16), and not near (Daniel 8:26; 12:4). The New
                  > Testament writers say that the Old Covenant prophets were told that
                  the last
                  > days events they were foretelling were not for their times.
                  However, the New
                  > Covenant prophets were told, and said that what the Old prophets
                  anticipated
                  > was being fulfilled and was about to be consummated (1 Peter
                  1:10f). In
                  > Revelation, for instance, the Danielic predictions serve as the
                  blueprint of
                  > the consummative events being foretold by John. What Daniel was
                  told was not
                  > near--and thus he was instructed to seal the book-- was now so near
                  in
                  > John's day that John was told not to seal the book. I do not find
                  anywhere
                  > in the Apocalypse that John communicated the idea that the events
                  he was
                  > foretelling were not near.
                  > If we can argue that "at hand" does not mean near, what will we
                  argue that
                  > "not at hand" means? If quickly does not mean soon, then does "not
                  near"
                  > mean it could happen very soon?
                  > These are but a few of the reasons why I disagree with the posit
                  that the
                  > chronological indicators of Revelation are not all that important.
                  The book
                  > is rife with indications that its fulfillment was near. The book is
                  > bracketed with warnings of the imminent consummation, and calls for
                  ethical
                  > conduct in light of that soon coming climax. There is more on this
                  than I
                  > have time to develop, but this issue alone emphasizes my point
                  well, I
                  > think.
                  > Well, I have gone on long enough.
                  > Thanks for your thoughts and inquiry,
                  > Don K. Preston
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.