S
Strangelove
Guest
This seems fine on the face of it. But there is serious and far reaching error. The very system employed ; "plain, grammatical, literal ,historical' approach to prophecy interpretation is subjective. Plain and literal to one may not be to another. But what is more sisinter is when this template is place on the ancient scriptures. The Old Testement. As has been practiced for 150 years or so in DF circles. What is wrong with that idea? is a valid question , especially since it seems ,plain and simple. What is wrong with it is that this template is used on OT scriptures over and above apostolic revelation. The New Testement.
I reckon this rebellion against apostolic authority leads quickly to all sorts of mischief. How can Pastor BillyBob, who interprets OT prophecy following his personal version of plain and literal, correct RayRay while RayRay is following his personal version of plain and literal.? The problem can never be solved because both have placed their own understanding and intellects over and above apostolic inspiration. The correct course is 180 degrees about, search first the apostles and follow their interpretations as well as possible.
Since the apostles have already been left behind (heh heh) there is no reason to expect some propehcy guru to stop and consider his failures. At the highsest level (DTS) there is no accouctability. The inevitable result of placing human understanding over divine revelation. This attracks and grants a platform to whom ever has a charasmatic style, and an abilty to locate an itch waiting to be scratched.
Agreed. Zech 14 prime example. Jesus and the Apostles are silent on the verses. Millenialists are sold on the idea these verses describe Jesus touching down on Earth at the 2nd advent and starting His blissful 1000 year reign.