Admin
|
Just Two Categories of Discernment: Spiritualized and Literalized
Posted : 5 Oct, 2013 05:47 AM
Just Two Categories of Discernment: Spiritualized and Literalized
On http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/...lism/#_ftnref3
"[Prophecy is] the ground of absolute literalness."[5]
"Jerusalem is always Jerusalem, Israel always Israel, Zion always Zion�Prophecies may never be spiritualized, but are always literal.[6]"
Quotes above are from C.I. Scofield, the first classical American dispensationalist.
In 1936, Lewis S. Chafer, a classical dispensationalist who founded the Dallas Theological Seminary, defined Scofield's literalism as "The outstanding characteristic of the dispensationalist is ... that he believes every statement of the Bible and gives to it the plain, natural meaning its words imply."
From: L. S. Chafer, �Dispensationalism,� Bibliotheca Sacra, 93, October (1936), pp410, 417.
Charles C. Ryrie says "This distinction between Israel and the church is born out of a system of hermeneutics that is usually called literal interpretation. Therefore, the second aspect of the sine qua non of dispensationalism is the matter of historical-grammatical hermeneutics. The word literal is perhaps not as good as either the word normal or plain, but in any case it is interpretation that does not spiritualize or allegorize as nondispensational interpretation often does. The spiritualizing may be practiced to a lesser or greater degree, but its presence in a system of interpretation is indicative of a nondispensational approach."
Since dispensationalism has been popular in the churches since the time of the Niagra Bible Conference of 1876 to 1897 and the 1909 Scofield Reference Bible, the literalist "hermeneutic" has been influential even beyond those who are followers of dispensationalism.
Notice that Scofield says "Prophecies may never be spiritualized, but are always literal." It is true that many Old Testament prophecies about the appearance of Christ were literally fulfilled. To say, however, that prophecy is always literal is a lie. This is because so much of Bible prophecy is in the language of metaphor, and some metaphors in prophecy are easier to understand than others. Revelation 11 happens to have metaphors that are harder to understand. Still, they are metaphors. Making them literal leads to false doctrines.
For dispensationalists, and many other Christians, there are only two categories for interpreting prophecy, literalist and "spiritualizing." Anything that is not literal is "spiritualizing." Following C.S. Scofield on literalist interpretation of prophecy and insisting there can only be literalist or "spiritualized" interpretations will almost always lead to false doctrines from prophecy.
"Spiritualizing" refers to the method of Origen. He used broad allegories to explain away Bible prophecy beyond the prophecies about the appearing of Christ. This over-allegorization was handed down by Augustine to the Catholic Church, and inherited by the followers of Calvin..
The language of metaphor in prophecy deals with specific metaphors, not huge allegories like saying the 144,000 of Revelation 7 and 14 are all saved people of all times.
For a great deal of Bible prophecy other than that about the appearing of Christ, the meanings of prophecy is destroyed either by over-allegorization or by making the prophecy literal, as in saying the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 are two guys like Moses and Elijah. To say they are Joshua and Zerubbabel is a little closer to what the text says, but Joshua and Zerubbabel are metaphoric in themselves, standing for something in the chapter - the two olive trees and the two candlesticks.
"...without a parable spake he not unto them:.......I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world."
"I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.; Hosea 12: 10
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." I Corinthians 2: 14
The natural man, who argues against the absolute truth of scripture, does not understand many metaphors in the Bible. Dispenationalist insistence on a literal interpretation of all metaphors in prophecy does not help this condition at all, in fact, it makes it worse.
Literalizing all scripture, and interpreting prophecy to be literal, when carried out somewhat consistently leads back into the Old Covenant. For physical Israel, under the Old Covenant, there was literal and physical circumcision, there was literal and physical descent from the DNA of Abraham, there was a literal and physical temple building, for physical Israel, the holy place.
But under the New Covenant, in Christ, and transformed by having his mind, that which was physical and literal was found to be mere shadow (Hebrews 10: 1, Colossians 2: 17). Christ and his doctrines are the substance, and all this is spiritual. The physical and literal in physical Israel was transformed into the spiritual house in I Peter 2: 5, and those so transformed become the chosen generation, the holy nation and a peculiar people (I Peter 2: 9).
Participating in the supernatural of God under the New Covenant means getting out of the literal and the physical, going out of the literal Jerusalem which now is and is in bondage to the physical and literal, and going into the new Jerusalem, which is free and is the mother of us all (Galatians 4: 25-26).
But the natural man rejects the spiritual and likes to get into quarrels with the absolute truth of the Word who is God (John 1: 1).
The physical, the flesh and the literal oppose the spiritual, and those who want to be in the Spirit always have to overcome, in themselves, that which is of the flesh. That opposition requires a strong love of the truth, which is Christ, to overcome the opposition of the flesh, of the physical and literal.
An example of literalizing is to make the two nations in Rebekah's womb of Genesis 25: 22-23 entirely physical, with the interpretation that Esau represents only the Arabs as a blood line while Jacob represents the chosen people, by blood line.
But - to "spiritualize" Genesis 25: 22-23 would be to interpret it also as having an application to the ongoing conflict between that which is physical and that which is spiritual. Esau is that which is physical, and Jacob represents that which is spiritual and transformative.
When Christ appeared on earth, only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15: 24), at the Cross,
Zion was translated from physical Israel to a small remnant of physical Israel who were reborn in Christ, and soon joined by an increasing number of Gentiles (Acts 10: 9-36), after the Gentile Cornelius was transformed by the Lord working through Peter.
But this change from the physical-literal to the spiritual is to run twice, so that Jacob, representing the spiritual, again overcomes Esau, representing the physical-literal. In the end time, Sion is to be translated from the Internal Revenue Service incorporated Babylon to that remnant seen in Revelation 12: 17, who have the testimony of Jesus Christ. In that change the physical as blood lines has no place, and the seed of Abraham is again, as Paul explains in Galatians 3: 3-29, his spiritual seed, which is the seed of God.
Those who are mired in the literal and physical cannot be transformed into the spiritual and tend to remain in the Old Covenant mindset, even though they claim to be Christians. However, there was a small remnant in the Old Testament who clearly did take part in the supernatural of God..But because this small remnant did so, cannot be taken to mean that all physical Israel, in its various false doctrines and false practices, also took part in the supernatural of God.
Israel reborn in Christ (John 3: 1-7), is what Paul in Galatians 6: 16 calls the Israel of God, meaning the Israel which is of God as opposed to the children of the flesh or physical Israel which rejected Christ (Romans 9: 6-8, and is not the Israel of God. Paul also identifies this reborn Israel in Romans 11: 26 in saying "And so all Israel shall be saved." But those mired in the physical and literal do not have eyes to see or hears to hear this, and insist Israel must always mean physical Israel, the majority of whom rejected the spiritual standing before them, Jesus Christ.
You can call Israel reborn in Christ Zion, or in the New Testament, Sion, as used, for example, in Romans 11: 26 and in John 12: 15.
Sion is the Body of Christ. But Babylon in Revelation 17 and 18 is the church in false doctrines and false practices. Babylon in Jeremiah 50 and 51 is physical Israel in false doctrines and practices. Babylon runs twice.
Sion has spiritual freedom in Christ; Babylon is in bondage to the flesh and to that which is literal..
Sion has Jesus Christ as her head; Babylon has popes and Christian celebrities, who operate in this age of deception.
The authority for Sion is the Word of God. But authority for Babylon is man made theologies. In Zion the remnant participates fully in the supernatural of God; in Babylon the majority is thought to be saved by making alter calls, joining the church and by procedures, and in Babylon whatever doctrine is held by the majority is its "truth." In Babylon the majority is thought never to be wrong, but in Sion, the church majority is seen to be in false doctrines.
In Sion the Word of God is absolute truth, but in Babylon the word is not absolute truth, but can be compromised, watered down, has shades of grey, has loop holes and ambiguities, and when not spelled out in great detail and spoon-fed, is replaced by man made doctrines. In fact, the Word is mostly replaced by man made doctrines in Babylon which pose as the Word, because scripture is spun by man made theologies.
"Come out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."
"And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee: and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee."
For the literalist, following Scofield, there must be a shortage of candles in Babylon, which for him is a literal place in what is now Iraq, and there bridegrooms and brides do not speak.
Literalizing all scripture, and interpreting prophecy to be literal, when carried out somewhat consistently leads back into the Old Covenant. For physical Israel, under the Old Covenant, there was literal and physical circumcision, there was literal and physical descent from the DNA of Abraham, there was a literal and physical temple building, for physical Israel, the holy place.
But under the New Covenant, in Christ, and transformed by having his mind, that which was physical and literal was found to be mere shadow (Hebrews 10: 1, Colossians 2: 16-17). Christ and his doctrines are the substance, and all this is spiritual. The physical and literal in physical Israel was transformed into the spiritual house in I Peter 2: 5, and those so transformed become the chosen generation, the holy nation and a peculiar people (I Peter 2: 9).
Participating in the supernatural of God under the New Covenant means getting out of the literal and the physical, going out of the literal Jerusalem which now is and is in bondage to the physical and literal, and going into the new Jerusalem, which is free and is the mother of us all (Galatians 4: 25-26).
But the natural man rejects the spiritual and likes to get into quarrels with the absolute truth of the Word who is God (John 1: 1).
Yet the natural man with a dialectic mindset will argue against the absolute truth of scripture from the side, that is, not dealing directly with the doctrine being presented, but changing the subject to some extent. Or the natural man with a dialectic mind will pick just a very small part of the presentation of a doctrine and quarrel against that, somehow thinking he can defeat the doctrine almost by a process of witchcraft.
For more on this subject see my separate post, "Dispensationalism and the Shadows of the Old Covenant in Hebrews 10: 1 and Colossians 2: 16-17"
Post Reply
|
