Okay. What does it mean?
Just Horsing Around - Not Enough Horses in the World to Fulfill Revelation 9:16
- Thread starter illinoisguy
- Start date
Are you still referring to “lamb”? If so, it refers to a sacrifice for sins. I’m not sure where you’re going with this….
But didn't they already have a sacrificial system in place at the time for sins?
We're talking about how to know what to interpret figuratively and what is literal. And we're starting where you suggested, at a point that is indisputably figurative.
And from that one seemingly small point, do you see what the implications are for Sinai, and for the entire temple cultus, and the nation who were called to worship with sacrifices and offerings?
Out of curiosity, what books were those?
Looking back at his list of published books, it’s possible I only read one, which is Misquoting Jesus. I’m a little fuzzy on whether I read another book of his or not. I don’t think I own the book anymore and it’s been probably twenty years since I read it, so can’t really recall much about it. Here’s a link with interview if you’re interested in what it’s about: https://www.npr.org/2005/12/14/5052156/bart-ehrmans-misquoting-jesus
You're telling us that you actually listened to this interview, and you thought it would add value to this discussion?
I'm not. I'm just wondering why you're so interested in him.
First of all, there’s no “us,” because you and I are the only one conversing at this point. Secondly, you asked me which books I’ve read by him. I researched his publications and realized I most likely have only read one, which I clarified. Since you inquired, I sent you a link to the book with an interview and said, “if you’re interested in what it’s about.” I never said I listened to the linked interview or that I thought it would add value to the conversation.
I hope you’re better at communicating with people in the real world than you are in the cyber world.
I’m not responding to a writ of mandamus here, so let’s cut out the silly Q&A session about a lamb being a literal vs figurative scenario. You’re trying to prove a point, and we could spend the next ten days with me answering your silly question, but we’re going to ultimately circle back to my original premise, which is a starting point of faith. (That’s why I included theology professors who are atheistic—they have vast biblical knowledge compared to us, but yet are unpersuaded to accept Jesus as their Savior). Also, Aleshanee’s point (and that of my childhood pastor cannot be disproven: we don’t know, conclusively, that those End Times images were figurative and not literal.
LOL. I think if you took a second look you'd see I was referring to the first interview you posted, and, yes, it was to the group.
Oh, it's not silly when we're talking about the identity of Christ. But it's evident that you have no real interest in discussing how to know what's figurative or spiritual in the scriptures, and that you were disingenuous in your query.
You don't think there is a way to know, and you cited the completely irrelevant drivel of an apostate in whom you seem take an unhealthy interest to prove it.
We can certainly know if your 'point' or conclusion can be supported by the teachings of the Apostles, or if they're based completely upon arbitrary and/or fallacious presuppositions.
Anyway, the knowledge isn't as elusive as you and she wish it to be. Bring the teaching of the Apostles to Revelation, not your vivid imagination, or the ramblings of an apostate.
Last edited:
Wow…you really really have a way of jumping to extreme conclusions. By the way, your approach seems at odds with Got Questions, which is a very reliable source, and not by an agnostic professor: https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,544
- Reaction score
- 3,134
- Points
- 113
Just for clarification, my citation of the blood and body passage wasn't a dig at you, nor your question. Matter of fact, the hermeneutical apparatus employed to answer your question is one of the most fundamentally important questions this forum (and Christianity in general) could ever tackle. The rules we use to come to understand the Bible's meaning is maybe the most sober undertaking we could endeavor to discuss, and certainly more weighty than much of what passes for conversation here (and that is not in any way a disparagement of those everyday discussions).
And you have a way of presuming ulterior motives where there are none.
As it is with anyone looking at prophecy through Dispensational Premillennial filters, but it's not at odds with Alpha and Omega Ministries, just to name another.
'Got questions' is no substitute for thinking or bible study, and, frankly, in regard to eschatology, it's low-hanging, wormy fruit. Folks tend to go there, pluck the first thing that comes to hand, and then think they have the last word on something. But it's got questions' entire paradigm that is being debated.
I, at least, was directing you to the Scriptures, and that from a point you yourself suggested, and asking you what they were saying to you. And you accuse me of ulterior motives.
So it's clear that you aren't really interested in a discussion about it, except where you can find confirmation for your biases.
Last edited:
Ahh…I see you edited out your little quip about Aleshanee.
Anyway, for now, on this issue I’m going to settle on relying on Got Questions rather than Got Ekklesian. The former is much more coherent, consistent and, frankly, considerate.
Yeah. It gets messy when her head explodes.hh…I see you edited out your little quip about Aleshanee.
Right. Though Ekklesian was merely asking you questions and letting you do your own thinking, with the assumption that thinking was what you wanted to do.
I do know better now, and will engage you in the future accordingly.
If you could learn to converse without mixing in insults and assumptions, I’d be happy to have a dialogue, but I think you do it so much that you don’t even know when you’re doing it!Right. Though Ekklesian was merely asking you questions and letting you do your own thinking, with the assumption that thinking was what you wanted to do.
I do know better now, and will engage you in the future accordingly.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2019
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 506
- Points
- 113
The best place to get guidance on how to interpret Bible prophecies is the Bible itself.
Isaiah 40:3-4 reads, "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places straight."
We are told in Matthew 3:1-3 that this prophecy was fulfilled by the ministry of John the Baptist: "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight."
Question: was the prophecy fulfilled literally? Was every valley in the wilderness of Judea filled in, and every mountain and hill leveled? How did John accomplish this - was he riding a Caterpillar tractor? How come there are still visible mountains and valleys in that region of Israel today?
Can anyone answer this without reference to Got Questions or the heretic Bart Ehrman? And what are the implications for our interpretation of Revelation?
Some of the issues of what should be understood literally are not that difficult to resolve. In John 6:53-54 Jesus spoke of eating His flesh and blood, but in John 6:63 He explained, "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."
Isaiah 40:3-4 reads, "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places straight."
We are told in Matthew 3:1-3 that this prophecy was fulfilled by the ministry of John the Baptist: "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight."
Question: was the prophecy fulfilled literally? Was every valley in the wilderness of Judea filled in, and every mountain and hill leveled? How did John accomplish this - was he riding a Caterpillar tractor? How come there are still visible mountains and valleys in that region of Israel today?
Can anyone answer this without reference to Got Questions or the heretic Bart Ehrman? And what are the implications for our interpretation of Revelation?
Some of the issues of what should be understood literally are not that difficult to resolve. In John 6:53-54 Jesus spoke of eating His flesh and blood, but in John 6:63 He explained, "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2019
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 506
- Points
- 113
Revelation 14:20 is an excellent example of why it unwise to try to interpret all scriptural prophecies in a wooden literal manner. Even Salem Kirban, who was known for his prophecy books promoting a literal approach to Revelation, rejects a literal interpretation of this verse:
"'Blood . . . unto the horse bridles.' Many feel compelled on the basis of this verse to demand that at Armageddon the blood of the wicked will flow into a stream which will become about 6 feet deep. While I do not doubt that God could perform such a miracle, yet I think this to miss the imagery.
"The farmer, or more often some young hired boy, jumps up and down in the winepress. . . . Here Rev. 14:20 depicts such a furious crushing from within the winepress which is below ground level that the red juice splashes upwards as high as a horse bridle - about 6 feet above ground. Thus this verse doesn't attempt to give us a reading on the exact depth of blood flowing: rather, I think, it indicates to us the terrible fury in which the Son of God will destroy those armed gathered behind the Beast and against Jerusalem at the end-time."
In other words, it's figurative.