A Dispensationalist has quoted an article which points out that wherever the Bible mentions the word 'thousand' it's never intended strictly literally - and is asking for help from other Dispensationalists.
Growing up I can remember hearing a lady say:
"He owns the cattle on a thousand hills..." (referencing Psalm 50:10), "...but what about on hill number 1001?"
Where Scripture-passages, written in straight prose, talk about the resurrection of the righteous, the elements melting with fervent heat, and the end of the world, each occurring at the 'last' day - at the 'last' trumpet - at the coming of the Lord - when 'the day' of the Lord shall come like a thief in the night - a popular version of Dispensationalism doesn't take that 'day' nor the word 'last' literally, but stretches it out over at least 1,007 years. Whether rightly or wrongly.
If rightly, should it therefore be considered necessary that the 'thousand years' - in a vision which included symbols, mentioned in the already highly-symbolic book of Revelation - be taken strictly as no more than 1,000 calendar years? Couldn't the basic tenets of Dispensationalism remain in tact, even if 'the thousand years' mightn't strictly mean no more than 1,000 calendar years?
Then again, it could also be seen as giving A-Millennialism a bit of leave I suppose, on that point. So I get why that mightn't be desirable, to many.
And it could also lead to not taking all of the details Ezekiel described seeing in a vision concretely either. But I also recall seeing somewhere once that if the dimensions of the New Jerusalem were taken concretely, it would reach as high into space as the orbit of the International Space Station. Is that true? If it is true, then maybe there didn't need to be a physical river flowing from the door of Ezekiel's temple either, right where everyone would be trying to enter. (Or that Daniel's mountain must physically fill the earth. Or that Revelation's star which fell to the earth would then be given a physical key, etc.)
But even if we can't decide such questions - would I really be missing half the point - or could we still derive from such prophecies the encouragement the imagery and dimensions instil? And could that have been the point - the intent?
Growing up I can remember hearing a lady say:
"He owns the cattle on a thousand hills..." (referencing Psalm 50:10), "...but what about on hill number 1001?"
Where Scripture-passages, written in straight prose, talk about the resurrection of the righteous, the elements melting with fervent heat, and the end of the world, each occurring at the 'last' day - at the 'last' trumpet - at the coming of the Lord - when 'the day' of the Lord shall come like a thief in the night - a popular version of Dispensationalism doesn't take that 'day' nor the word 'last' literally, but stretches it out over at least 1,007 years. Whether rightly or wrongly.
If rightly, should it therefore be considered necessary that the 'thousand years' - in a vision which included symbols, mentioned in the already highly-symbolic book of Revelation - be taken strictly as no more than 1,000 calendar years? Couldn't the basic tenets of Dispensationalism remain in tact, even if 'the thousand years' mightn't strictly mean no more than 1,000 calendar years?
Then again, it could also be seen as giving A-Millennialism a bit of leave I suppose, on that point. So I get why that mightn't be desirable, to many.
And it could also lead to not taking all of the details Ezekiel described seeing in a vision concretely either. But I also recall seeing somewhere once that if the dimensions of the New Jerusalem were taken concretely, it would reach as high into space as the orbit of the International Space Station. Is that true? If it is true, then maybe there didn't need to be a physical river flowing from the door of Ezekiel's temple either, right where everyone would be trying to enter. (Or that Daniel's mountain must physically fill the earth. Or that Revelation's star which fell to the earth would then be given a physical key, etc.)
But even if we can't decide such questions - would I really be missing half the point - or could we still derive from such prophecies the encouragement the imagery and dimensions instil? And could that have been the point - the intent?
No comments:
Post a Comment