TiL- Pros and Cons of the Grammatical Historical method of interpretation

Good evening. This is the truth and love podcast. Thank you for joining us and watching. Hope you will stick around tonight

We are going to have another conversation on post millennialism

Welcome to the truth and love podcast. I'm with Dan tonight and we're so so thankful that you support us

Thank you. Thank you for watching. We really appreciate it. I hope you had a Wonderful time if you were able to go to your worship service this morning

We hope we hope you had a wonderful time at worship as you join your assembly your fellowship your church to worship the true and living

God the Trinity father son of Holy Spirit and Full of worship full of song a good message from the word and so we we pray that you were able to experience that this morning and We're gonna have a continued conversation.

I won't I won't Dan to to kind of introduce that a little bit later To help us understand why we're having this conversation

And and where it's coming from kind of the background of the conversation itself But but Dan had a topic that we wanted to touch on before we get started.

By the way, the comments are open Even if you're watching this later or listening later, leave us a comment.

Send us an email Give us a critique a prayer request, whatever you'd like. Just let us know that you're watching

We would really appreciate it. But if you're watching live right now, we would love to hear from you I have to do is say hello but if you have a question, we'll try to answer it, so what was the

What was the topic you wanted to start out with? I don't know What was it

Well, uh the movie the princess brought he said let me explain no no there is too much let me sum up so Let me sum up.

I I'm in the process of writing a master's thesis where I'm looking at the consistency of a solid literal grammatical historical hermeneutic and The doctrine of post -millennialism.

Can you arrive at a post -millennial conclusion? Approaching the Bible from a literal grammatical historical now.

Do you want to break all that down when we get to the questions? because that's

That's kind of a lot of big words there didn't it's a lot of big words. It's academic kind of yeah

I've been I've been writing it for a while. So Like those words seem smaller to me after saying them so much all the bugs words.

All right so Basically Basically a big basically what that means is

When you look at the Bible when you look at scripture You want to understand what the author said?

Written what his intent was not what you think he said But what he actually said what he actually meant you do that by looking at his words the grammar that he used because the grammar kind of Boxes in what a possible meaning can be

You know nouns mean noun things verbs do verb things. You can't go away from those so you kind of constricted by what the grammar allows and you're kind of Boxed in or you're giving guidelines.

It's more better thing of like bumper guards By the historical context like what was what was that?

What were the things going on during his time? How did they talk during that time period had certain things occurred yet?

Had they not occurred yet? What did the people know? What were they trying to accomplish? Where have they just come from? Where are they going?

That obviously the context is different for the people in the book of Judges after they've already come into the land

They're seeing the blessings and the curses either come upon them or go away from them It would be a different context altogether than Moses leading the people out of Egypt different place different purpose

It changes what What the person says it could it changes depending on?

It would change the meaning of it depending on where they are what they're doing where they're going all of that it's the same thing with With different letters and stuff if you have somebody who's writing a love letter and they say something mushy

It can mean one thing But if you have somebody writing to say a political opponent, they say something that would sound mushy in a romantic context it very well may be

Sarcastic and meant to be hurtful even mocking. So what is the context?

so I was studying all of that trying to see if You approach the

Bible Looking at the grammar looking at the history looking at what the author originally intended

Can you arrive at a post -millennial? understanding of the end times

Which will like the entire episode after I get done with this section is going to be on defining post -millennialism

So I'll define that later But in my in my studies

Came across some instances where It seemed like the intent of the author in an

Old Testament passage When it was quoted by a New Testament author, it would sometimes seem to be different.

So What was the Original intent of the author how much of that do

I carry forward into the New Testament interpretation of it? How do I understand that?

How can these things be? And what I recognized Actually, let me tell you this it was pretty neat I was studying that wrote my section on that and in my paper and then

Sunday morning this morning My pastor brought up this exact topic in his sermon like he doesn't bring up You know, what is a grammatical historical hermeneutic, but for whatever reason maybe because I was texting with him about the paper but he he brought it up and It was it was really interesting to hear his take on it

In fact, I'm probably gonna go back and transcribe part of his sermon inserted into the paper We had to say it was really good.

And then tonight in The sermon that my my friend and pastoral intern

Ryan was pretty was preaching a sermon out of John 12 He quoted in in that passage from Isaiah 6 and if you just read

Isaiah you would not come to the conclusion that John came to so How can we say a grammatical historical interpretation of Scripture?

if if we're trying to understand what the author originally meant, how do we put those two things together and I think the key here is

The inspiration of Scripture Since we since we believe that God didn't make errors in the preservation of his scripture that we have the words

That he wants us to have And we believe that those words tell us that the

Bible was inspired you know all Scripture is given by inspiration of God It's profitable for doctrine for proof for correction for instruction and righteousness since God has preserved us the words

And not only done that he was instrumental in their authorship. What do we do with that when we come to?

hermeneutics we come to Bible interpretation Whose authorial intent whose original intent do we go with when we understand the scriptures?

It's important to understand the historical context it's important to understand The the grammar that's being used, but I believe it's more important to understand

That since it's inspired the ultimate author the one who compiled the scriptures is one person one

God through the person of the Holy Spirit and Since that's the case

When we read things in the Old Testament that seem to have a different New Testament interpretation

We need to put a greater emphasis on the New Testament interpretation now we call this

Scripture interpret scripture the more the more clear Interpreting the less clear.

Yeah. Yeah, go ahead. Well, I just wanted to take a timeout. Um, yeah well to maybe clarify one of the words that you use because If somebody listens to this and you can you can tell me if you agree or disagree but You made the comment the

New Testament has a different interpretation or Understanding than the

Old Testament passage. And so I'm thinking someone someone may interpret that as saying we're saying there's a there's a contradiction between the the

Old Testament interpretation New Testament interpretation and And I'm just right right off the top of my head trying to think well, how can

I harmonize that how can I say that more clearly Where I'm not saying or or it's sounding like it's a contradiction and I think

I think I can put it like this The the

Old Testament passage when it's When it was given by that author, you know from the

Holy Spirit to that author of that letter to the original audience the interpretation was was localized

For that audience and and so the the New Testament interpretation is

In in the context, I'm gonna use the word different again but I don't want to use the word different because I think the word different makes it sound like They're contradictory interpretations, but but they're not right

Right They are different, but they're not Contradictory, right and I believe you get to that place of it not being contradictory because The original intent is not necessarily the original human author but the original intent is the the original

We'll say pneumatic author which is very fancy word for the Holy Spirit wrote it

It was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Now. All of this is kind of abstract I think it would probably be helpful to look at an example then we can actually you know they say it's easier to turn or steer a moving ship or I don't know if you hold your arm up if you know if you hold your arm up off the table and try to write

Your handwriting looks like a two -year -old did it but if you anchor your hand down on the on the paper You can write like a regular human being.

I mean some people can some people still have terrible handwriting, but your handwriting If you have it, you know your elbow up or if your elbows down so if we can actually get an example

We might be able to make more sense of it pull it out of the abstract and put it on something concrete people can understand how it can be different and yet There's one truth being communicated throughout the whole

The whole of Scripture now Isaiah may not have known what that truth was in full in fact, the

Bible says in some places that the Old Testament prophets and the angels wanted to see

The things that we see they were looking out very intently To see what it is that's going on.

What is being revealed here in this new covenant? What is what is the new thing that God is is doing because while they saw glimpses and types and shadows

They didn't see the exact fullness of revelation like we've been given and well

Paul even speaks of it as a mystery sure That it's that it's now been you know revealed or we can see it we can understand it now

But it was it was a mystery up until then Yep, and and God revealed to us exactly what he was talking about so I guess we'll go to Isaiah 6 and we'll put some put some feet on this thing before we

We move on. All right so Isaiah 6 Is the passage where Isaiah is going before God He's he's in a vision and he saw

Seraphim, you know six wings and they were going around saying holy. Holy. Holy is the

Lord God of hosts And he saw he saw God there and he was he was terrified

Woe is me. I'm a man of unclean lips. I'm from a people of unclean lips. I'm undone

No, what's gonna happen to me? I cannot stand on my own in the sight of God So he took the angel took a coal touched his his tongue and cleansed him and It said in verse eight go down to eight

I Heard the voice of the Lord saying whom shall I send and who will go for us?

It's very very interesting. There was there was an angel there and then there was a

God and Isaiah so as he was looking around like I guess is me You probably also saying

Lord. I'm willing. Please send me but it was also interesting that he was Kind of kind of there.

No, there wasn't many options Says here I am send me and he said go and tell this people

Keep on hearing but do not understand keep on seeing but do not perceive

Make the heart of this people dull and their ears heavy shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and Return and be healed or repent and be healed

Then he's then I said so Isaiah said to the Lord How long so how long am

I going to do this and he answered him? Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant

The houses are without a man and the land is utterly desolate The Lord has removed men far away and forsaken places are many in the midst of the land

But yet a tenth will be in it and will return and be for consuming as a

Terabith tree or as an oak whose stump remains when it's cut down. So the Holy Seed Shall be its stump

Leave that Holy Seed being talking about Christ But in in the portion that is quoted in the book of John it says

Keep on hearing but do not understand keep on seeing but do not perceive

He's speaking to them or he's telling Isaiah when you go out and you talk to this people this people who has

The Assyrian army, you know around them the Assyrian army going to come for them going to cause destruction

When you go out and preach this message, it's gonna fall on deaf ears. They're not going to listen they're not going to turn from their sin and in the process they're going to be destroyed and they're gonna be destroyed off the land and so really this is a prophecy to Isaiah speaking of The coming of the coming going in the going into exile that's going to take place a little bit later

But Also, you see down here in the end of verse 13 So the

Holy Seed shall be its stump what's going to come from? What's the end result of all of this destruction?

It's going to be The the Holy Seed the one that's been promised from way back in the book of Genesis When he's going to come and crush the head of the serpent so How would

Isaiah have understood that Isaiah would have understood it that Isaiah is going to go out to preach Isaiah is going to have his people not listen he's going to preach until there's a destruction of the people and the people are going to be

Destroyed so badly that only attempts are gonna be left when the 10th is left from that remnant will come the

Messiah that's the way that he would have understood it and Yet when we turn over to the book of John chapter 12 and we get into verse 37 and 38

Let's see we see this

He quotes Isaiah in chapter 53 first and they quotes the passage that we just read

Speaking of Jesus's but although he had done so many he had done so many signs before them

They did not believe in him That the word Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled which he spoke

Lord who has believed our report and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

Therefore they could not believe because Isaiah said again, and here's Isaiah from chapter 6 where we just read

He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts Unless they should see with their eyes unless they should understand with their hearts and Turn so that I should heal them

These things Isaiah said when he saw his glory and spoke of him

So John is saying that Isaiah's prophecy

Isaiah was written down in the book of Isaiah Ultimately wasn't about Isaiah and the coming destruction at the hand of the

Assyrians While that might be what Isaiah understood it to Mean originally.

Well, that is what he should have gone out with the understanding from that encounter the full

Meaning the full weight of that conversation. The as Paul Harvey said the rest of the story

Was that John under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is telling us

That wasn't even about Isaiah and the people of his day that was actually about Christ in his coming and that the people would reject his message and They would not they wouldn't turn their hearts and repent

Then there would be a destruction and Then there would be a remnant and from that remnant would come

The seed I believe the seed of the kingdom being the the thing that would start small and grow into a large tree where all the

Come where a small, you know small bit 11 gets into the bread and comes a big lump it's actually speaking of the

Seeming non -response of the people of Israel to the preaching of Jesus which ends in The great glorious coming of Christ's kingdom upon the earth

So explain to me how that messes me up if I am I'm proclaiming

I'm stuck on the grammatical historical method of interpretation and I go to the text and here's my text and I'm You're talking about Isaiah and I'm in Isaiah I'm using my grammatical historical interpretation interpretation method

How am I messed up here? well Here's there's a danger.

The danger is When when you take the understanding of Isaiah And say it since it had to have been speaking about Isaiah Then you come here and you see

John Saying that it was being spoken of of the Lord you can end up conflating the two accounts and and You may end up looking for something that was spoken of in the passage in Isaiah That's not in view in this passage in John so for instance in Isaiah It says

Until the cities are laid waste and without Inhabitant the houses are without a man the land is utterly desolate the

Lord has removed men far away So you're looking for cities that are going to be? laid waste without inhabitant

Then you look for the destruction and then a tenth and then the stump and then the Holy See so What of this coming destruction in the book of John Were there lots of cities that were destroyed in Israel?

Or was it mainly just? the city of Jerusalem oh Well, this couldn't have been what was spoken of in Isaiah.

This was the start now There has to be a gap where we're waiting for a full -on destruction of the cities surrounding

Israel Which may enter into a time of you know tribulation

Thousand -year reign or whatever else you end up having to You try to take details from one situation fit them into the later context which they weren't meant to be in and Then extrapolating out of that Things into the future because you haven't seen everything come to pass so far.

I know this is not this particular passage is not as problematic as some other ones

Mainly if you look at like the book of Daniel You look at the different layers of Nebuchadnezzar statue you come to the end and the

Folks will look at the difference between the toes of iron and clay and the the late the legs of iron and They'll be looking for specific

Things from that passage and they won't see them as They're revealed and laid out

I'm getting abstract abstract again, but And they'll try to insert a gap

Into there where it says in the it clearly says well clearly says in the days of these

Kings, right? Then how did we miss that It's gonna be about seven or eight pages on just time indicators and no paper so Yeah so the the main thing with with The original intent or authorial intent is to remember that if God has spoken through a

New Testament writer and Giving you an interpretation of an Old Testament passage

Whatever you thought you understood about that Old Testament passage has to give away to what the

New Testament author says and here's why not because The Old Testament was wrong not because the

Old Testament said anything that wasn't Proper but because God has told you through the

New Testament writer the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit of that New Testament writer is giving you a divinely inspired

Commentary on what is taking place in the Old Covenant in the Old Testament So when

John is here saying that this passage is actually about Christ Whatever else we could have gleaned from the book of Isaiah by looking at Isaiah alone

We have to let anything that anything that we would you know shove into that mold

Fall away with the understanding that what God is saying is that this passage is

Ultimately speaking about Christ. Yeah, and so when we look at it, we need to remember that God has revealed that to us as well

Because the temptation would be to to hold ourselves back in that Old Testament context

And not remember what God has said in the future because it's less important that Isaiah was going to get ignored and More important that Christ was seemingly going to have a little effect on the people in his area

But from that was going to come the Holy Seed Yeah was going to come the great growing of his kingdom that's that's what

Isaiah was really saying Even though as a didn't know Isaiah was just writing down the vision that he saw the conversation that he had

But what God was revealing in type and shadow Isaiah's thrilled to find out about now like oh, that's what

I was saying. That's so cool. I'm really The angels are looking forward to it

Isaiah was looking forward to it. Isaiah's thrilled to watch everything that he wrote about unfold before his eyes

Yeah, he watches from heaven But do you think that there was?

there was at least some kind of I Know you said that Isaiah didn't he didn't know

About the the future interpretation and the the full full meaning of the text that he was writing

But do you think that there was there was some indication that There was something coming because Of course, they didn't know and they didn't know until it was revealed

You know once the kingdom had come Jesus himself had come the revealing had had happened and had started and And Jesus began to reveal, you know, this is what it was saying.

It was talking about me But they did have some kind of I Thought that there was something coming.

I mean they were they were looking for Messiah Yep, and they had the wrong idea of what that Messiah would look like, but they did have a

They thought that he was coming right back back in Deuteronomy. It actually says explicitly

That from the people of Israel is going to arise a prophet. That's like a brother to them

One of their own people and that he was going to be the Messiah Yeah, so they knew that there was a prophet coming who was going to be like them

They're going to listen to that prophet whatever he said At least they were supposed to right?

But right and you have Isaiah 53 Which is here in John.

Yeah, the suffering servant. So I mean there's there's forward looking forward to That In the midst of his

Writing about That that local time sure and what was gonna happen, right?

And I believe in the New Testament where it says that they were looking ahead. They understood that there was something else going on I just didn't know what it was.

They knew that this is what God was wanting me to write down This is what God would have would have revealed to me and I don't know the entire story

But God is telling a story his way and I'm glad to put down my part Yeah, yeah, and and that helps make sense of the

New Testament passages where you know Jesus is walking on the road to Emmaus and he's explaining to them it right.

It was all pointing to me and then a Verse that I was looking at tonight 2nd

Timothy chapter 3 verse 15 Paul Stone Timothy and that from childhood you have known you have known the sacred writings

Which are able to give you wisdom that leads to salvation through faith, which is in Christ Jesus, but That ability to know or or that wisdom that's obtained here because of what's in the sacred scriptures

Is only happening because of the the new age is here. The New Kingdom is here At that point

Timothy was being led to understand the scriptures by the Holy Spirit, right? Yeah. Yeah So that makes it yeah

Real quick for our Pentecostal friends if you want if you want to understand

Joel to you have to understand acts to If you're going to understand what

Joel was talking about You have to understand how the Holy Spirit revealed to us in the New Testament What that passage meant?

What was? The what was being said there? Is it you know?

tongues of prophecy for everyone all the time or Was there a specific application of that prophecy that showed a specific truth?

Which I believe acts boils it or restricts what we can say from Joel I Believe it restricts that that's another

Instance where we need to remember or need to understand what the Holy Spirit is revealed to us

About a passage, you know when we go back and seek to interpret it We we have to take into account what

God has told us about that particular passage Otherwise, we're we're we're at best coming up coming up with something that's incomplete.

Yeah, I Think and I think you feel the same way that the grammatical historical method is still the the best

Method to use it. It's solid but it does have that deficiency If if we neglect

If we neglect to allow the scriptures to interpret themselves because it ignores the

It ignores the overall authorship of the Bible by God himself.

Yeah, I think well, I think that's key that we you you've got to keep in mind That Holy Spirit is the the ultimate author and Let me see if I can smooth it out just a little bit and in what

I'm thinking because when we were talking about it off -air When you begin to explain this

This line of thinking and what you were what's going on with the grammatical historical method It was taking me immediately back to the debate.

I watched Yesterday with dr. James White and some other doctor that I never heard of his last name starts with a

K Can't even remember his last name van van Keet or killed or something anyway, and and so it was the

James White was was on the side of I don't know how to explain it the other guy was was basically the the textus receptus the

King James only side and And that that's the textus receptus is the original

Authorship and So we we shouldn't trust these, you know modern translations or whatever and and James White of course is on the other side and so Before you got to the point in your explanation of looking at this grammatical historical method

You began to talk about the authorship of the Holy Spirit and This was before you began to explain what you're talking about and I was like, okay he's taking me back to this guy was looking listening to on the debate because Their argument when they're talking about the

King James only that the TR is the original author they're like You you can't use all these different manuscripts and compare and use, you know

Critical the critical method to try to figure out, you know, which is the the the best or What the authors were trying to say what

Using all the different manuscripts try to figure out which which words the authors originally used he's like that's

That's inappropriate. That's not right he was like we need to we need to trust and believe in the

Bible the way we trust and believe in God in every other area of life and You know that that pulls somebody in because it's it's very

Spiritualized language, you know, don't you trust in God for you for your family for your life for your soul?

You know for everything else in your life. Don't you don't you trust God in that area? why don't you just trust

God that this is his word and he he spiritualized it, you know so much and And so James White is like I think what

I will the way I was hearing and understanding James White's argument or my take from it was

You know, that's not how The Holy Spirit, you know, the King James is is a good version you can use it, but that's not how

God to the Holy Spirit his method of Preserving his word throughout history.

Sure His method of preserving his word throughout history is in in this way where You you know, you have all these different copies

Because man's gonna make error in their copy Mm -hmm. And the reason you have so many copies is so that you can you know, look and see which is the most consistent and narrow it down to eventually get to the original autograph itself and The other guy was like no just spiritualizes it.

No, you just got to trust the Holy Spirit well When it when it comes to this and using the grammatical historical method.

I Was like no, we don't want to spiritualize it, you know, just just trust the

Holy Spirit Let him tell you the interpretation and that's not where you went with it

But I think I think a way that it can be smoothed out where we can trust trust that method

To give it more of a give it a Foundation because I think we were we're trying to trying to chip away or it sounded like we're chipping away at the foundation of this method

One way to make it more solid I think for me will be to say that this is the this is the way the

Holy Spirit has has chosen to for us to interpret his word because Yes, he is the original author

And he chose to use men to write it on page or write it on Manuscript right on scroll, whatever the case may be that that was his method of Passing it down giving it to humanity

All right but but ultimately you have the human author and you have the Holy Spirit author and the

Holy Spirit is above the human author the original and You know, he he comes from him and then through the the human author

And My reasoning is the reason that he chose that method would be and I think this is what smooths it out is that If if we take away

The human aspect of it, you know Then we begin to spiritualize it

We become we become a cult or we become you know, we cause the scripture to say whatever we wanted to say because that's the

Holy Spirit speaking to me and That's what I'm hearing him say that interpretation of that scripture is because he's the ultimate author and I'm just listening to him

Wait a second Yes, he is the ultimate author, but he chose this method of interpretation the grammatical historical method so that we don't get off balance and get off track and say

We're hearing from him when we're really not Right, right Instead of thinking about it like chipping away at the grammatical grammatical historical method we should think of it more like this

God has spoken to us through language Which means that the grammatical historical method is absolutely valid way to interpret scripture

However, there are going to be things that we're not going to understand because of the nature of the one who's communicating to us

Right, so God who is higher than us his ways are not our ways his thoughts are higher than our thoughts from time to time

He had to dumb it down for us and say alright guys Well, you may have understood me to say this

What I was actually getting at was this so well, I Don't know.

Let's say 90 95 98 percent of the time I don't so it's high percentage of the things that are not repeated or expounded upon We should take it plain grammatical historical face value

But when God has saw fit to explain a portion of scripture to us

Excuse me heartburn When God saw fit to take the time to explain something to us from scripture a portion of scripture

Then his interpretation has to trump anything that we come up with Historical method because His ways are higher than our ways.

His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and this is his method of communicating to us

That's right. So when we look at authorial intent or what is the original intent of the author?

Yeah, his intent was to communicate to Isaiah Hey, this is gonna happen to you his intent for all of mankind through history

Was to point to Christ Through the words he spoke to Isaiah Yeah, I think that's

I think that's the point that I was trying to make as well To keep both in mind.

Yeah because I mean if you look at the original authors intent of that passage in the

Old Testament and and his his focus there is Primarily what's going on locally?

We you know, we can still learn from that and what what God is doing throughout that historical timeline

And then when we when we take into consideration the ultimate authors Meaning within it understood than the

New Testament interpretation We get the full And a helpful way to think about that so that we can we can understand what

God was was trying to get at If we remember that the point of the story

While it's told from Isaiah's point of view The the the pivot point of the story is not

Isaiah's point of view, but God's view God called Isaiah up into his throne room.

God had the angel touch his mouth with the cold God was the one

Communicating to Isaiah that people weren't going to listen to his message But that there was going to be something positive that emerged from all the destruction that was going to take place

So what was God? Communicating God was communicating his message of redemption

Which is always that always had been planned to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ So when

God was speaking God was speaking to Isaiah in a way that would further his redemptive plan

By giving Isaiah direct communication on what he was supposed to do and revealing

To To people later on that this was also going to happen to the

Christ This is also gonna happen to Jesus so that that word may be completely fulfilled in Christ so It's really easy for us because most of the

Bible is written from a human perspective looking at Things that are going on now as part of the prophets are not and they're

God telling us exactly what he's looking at but like when you see the historical accounts of like David or Samson these are written down from humans watching history unfold when we need to also remember that these are things that were ordained and planned by God for his redemptive purposes throughout history

Yeah, so if we can keep in mind that God's plan throughout history is one in singular Then his message is going to be the same even if it

Even if it can communicate To a specific person in a specific time it he is well within his rights to be speaking in the long term as well to be

It's almost like Isaiah Back up will tell a story and we'll make it work

When I was first converted I was in my actually

I wasn't I blew a tire I was fixing a tire in my mom's car in the parking lot of an apartment complex in Charlotte I had two young men in white shirts with name tags.

They're like 18 19 years old. I said elder they came up and said Would you like to talk about the church?

And so I said absolutely let's talk because I was gonna make those guys look stupid I just knew it. I was gonna make those guys look stupid

So I set an appointment that came back and they sat there in my living room He told me that I needed to know

Jesus and that I needed to I Needed to turn from my sin and find him as a

Savior Now what they were meaning by who Jesus was turning from sins and all of that was

Miles away from what I heard and understood. Mm -hmm They they had a plan

To bring me into Mormonism to have me get Baptized go through the endowment ceremony live a

Mormon life get the holy underwear and all that. That's right But I heard you need to repent of your sin.

You need to turn unto Christ and need to find forgiveness of your sin Amen, let's go

God speaking to Isaiah had Not the heretical view of Mormonism, let's

Back up a step, but God was speaking to the coming Christ But when he spoke he communicated in such a way to where Isaiah also understood what he was supposed to do in his context

So while we're hearing the the account from Isaiah's perspective What God was trying to communicate?

Was that longer message? And that's what he did communicate and we find that out explicitly through John's interpretation of what

Isaiah wrote It looks like you and I both are working on that pearl of great price

Extra shiny I Guess this would be my last question.

Um, sure unless something else comes up Do you think the

Holy Spirit I Know I know he's consistent. I know he doesn't contradict itself But do you think that he's using the same method in the

Old Testament and New Testament in this way? where you you were describing that passage in Isaiah where Isaiah was speaking about This happening here

But also there was a time with it would happen. The the cities would be destroyed or in Jerusalem You were talking about that time period it would have to happen again, or it was pointing to a time where it would happen again

And it made me think about the the passages in Revelation where people think that there's gonna be a

Renewed Babylon's gonna come back or whatever But when it speaks about Babylon, let's please about Egypt Sodom and Gomorrah What the

Holy Spirit from understanding is doing there in Revelation is saying Is is calling out or comparing

Jerusalem to evil Sodom and Gomorrah to evil Egypt to evil Babylon So It's kind of a

Kind of a double thing going on there.

You know you you there's Sodom but Sodom was being used as a comparison or to Jerusalem Yep, and so you you kind of have the same thing going on in in Isaiah You know,

I'm speaking about this, but I'm also speaking and comparing it to this this time in the future

Yeah, it's gonna happen Yep, um what you have what you what what you're describing is

Expressly stated by God in the prophecy to Daniel in Daniel 9 verse 24 it says 70 weeks or 70 sevens are determined for your people and for your holy city to finish transgression

To make an end of sins to make reconciliation for iniquity to bring in everlasting righteousness Here we go to seal up vision and prophecy

What do you mean to say a lot? It means that there's going to be a

Closing of the canon the types and shadows the loose ends the threads that have been running all throughout the fabric of scripture all throughout all of history

They're going to be brought together and the typology is going to be finished When these things occur being the ending of the

Old Covenant age and the bringing in of the New Covenant age when those when

Christ has come to make an end of sin make reconciliation for Iniquity to bring in everlasting righteousness to no secure eternal life people at that time when

Christ has spoken Crisis finishing what he's doing is he's taking all the types and shadows that he's revealed along the way

Tying them up into a to a tidy little bow and saying here The things that I've been revealing throughout all of history

Find their complete fulfillment in me and what I've been doing So you're right when it says

Babylon and it refers to Know that the evil wicked age and they refer us to Egypt and is actually talking about Israel I was talking about The those no different things and he's bringing all of those those pictures those ideas together

He's wrapping them up. He's searing the end so that whether they're nice and tight I don't know how knitting or crocheting works or anything like that But you come to the end of a row or even on a weavers beam

You come to the end of a row and somehow you you finish you feel I don't know how you finish it

But but you finish it it's it's all tied up neatly so that way it's contained it's a whole it's a piece of cloth

It's a fabric the type and shadow is being fully revealed in the reality that God has spoken to us

So the so the types from the Old Testament the anti type is the New Testament and the New Testament is saying

I'm wrapping it up like a bow you had you had the type you had the shadow and I'm the fulfillment and it's complete

We've run out of time, so I'm gonna ask you one more question which kind of points to our original topic which

Next week's topic so Let me ask the question and it'll lead into hopefully next week

We will talk more about post -millennialism and your paper and what you're working on so Let's go back to what you were saying in Daniel okay, and you were talking about the

The prophecies being sealed up being finished We have the types in the

Old Testament the anti type is in the New Testament. It's been revealed It's been completed

Jesus said it's finished and and I'm thinking about that key word there in Daniel. It's sealed up all right, so and and this brings us to post -millennialism which

I would say most of the people that we talk to listen to Recommend would be from the partial preterist perspective.

Sure But here you're talking about how does what you just said not lead us to the full preterist perspective

Right, um just because a Just because something that was in typology or a type or a shadow

Just because it's been wrapped up with a bow and the New Covenant doesn't mean that it's over Doesn't mean that it's been fulfilled or done just means that we know if it's not been done.

We know What's going to take place? for instance While Christ returned to Have judgment upon Jerusalem in 70

AD. We also believe that he's coming again to raise the

The living and the dead the the wicked and the righteous To judge them according to his righteous standard that those who are found in Christ will be separated.

No sheep and goats Good fish bad fish. Mm -hmm. However, um

What we're not saying is that all of the types and shadows have been completely fulfilled

What we are saying is that all the types and shadows are being revealed to have been or will be revealed to be fulfilled in Christ so If it wasn't done in his first coming it will be done through the kingdom age where he is saving of people for himself where he is causing them to where he commands us to go out and baptize people command them to obey everything that Christ has commanded us and on into the future where Christ will return and Usher in the the eternal state where we'll be judged and we'll be with the

Lord forever So what we're not saying is that all those things have happened But what we are saying is that we know their fulfillment will take place in Christ.

They've been they've been revealed They've been revealed to us. If not Even though they're not past tense

Like in history they are They've been revealed to us. Yeah, what what's going to take place, right?

Maybe not exactly but right I'm not looked into full preterism a lot at at all but so there's one thing that I've not

I don't understand that I would like to look into and Get a better handle on which is probably one of the more simple aspect of full preterism is

Because we as partial preterist, you know, we believe that the prophecies and in Matthew 24 of the destruction of Jerusalem Kind of set the timeline of the ending of the old age that transition period was over and the the transition had started

But it's and it's It's only one left old age is gone. The new age has come and and we're in the

Millennial Kingdom Sure figured it figuratively. We're in the millennia Millennial Kingdom Actually, not just figurative actually well figuratively as in numerically 1000 years.

Yeah But actually in the Millennial Kingdom, you're exactly right. So so we're in the

Millennial Kingdom What is the full preterist

Where do they say we are right now because if they believe all that has been fulfilled

Where are we now? From my understanding the full preterist believes that we are presently in the eternal state

That that those who are on the earth the judgment full and final the

Resurrection and everything took place at The the

From my understanding at 70 AD when he returned in judgment, he returned fully and finally

That was it So now for the rest of eternity

Mankind will live upon the earth and die be judged immediately and off into Their new spiritual home of either perdition or paradise hmm, so they're not looking forward to a future resurrection.

They're not looking forward to a Future coming of Christ they say that history and everything is just There you ever played a video game where you beat the game, but they still allow you to play

I've never played a video game where I beat the game I Sometimes some of the role -playing games

There there are video games where where you you play and there's there's a whole storyline to it yeah, and when you get done with the final chapter and then you

Are still allowed to play afterwards but And you still have some little minor missions, but the big overarching story is ended

So you don't have anything to look forward to you just kind of run around doing all the fun stuff that you wish you could Have done when you're trying to beat the game

So you just get to go through and jump off the buildings or try to blow stuff up because there's no consequences anymore

It's it's kind of like that. No, there's real real things at stake for those who are still alive but as far as any

Extra things that are going to occur There's no return. There's no

Retraction because all of that has taken place already. I'm sure they have Proof text for all that.

I would just be interested to see what it is Yeah, I can't think of anything right now

One of the one of the dangers of being a partial preterist is having a faulty hermeneutic a faulty method of interpreting the

Bible and falling into full preterism That's one of those things that we should we should guard against because if we if we assume every single thing is

Referring to 70 AD. We don't do our due diligence to look into it. We can come to the conclusion that everything's already taken place

That's in fact one of the best partial preterist postmillennial authors out there

David Chilton Towards the end of his life Was being rebuked by big names in the post -millennial camp because he had slid into full preterism

And I don't know Before he died if he if he turned if he returned or not

But as far as we know he Ended his life as a

As a heretic, I don't I mean, I don't know that I mean Right all the ins and outs.

I don't claim to know him or anybody involved in the situation not gonna pass judgment on the guy, but We do know that he slid off into full preterism at least for a time

And so it's one of those things where you know, if a mind that brilliant can do it. We need to be

Mark crossing our eyes, yeah sure that Hermit our

Bible interpretation method is a very important thing to get nailed down, right?

Well, I think that's why that was a good topic tonight. Yeah accidentally

I Don't know how we made an hour out of it when we did and to go back on your question about the video games

I don't think that it will fit your analogy very well but Does beating

Mike Tyson's punch -out count? I? Don't think so.

I Didn't think it would but I You win do what you still get the box people after you win

Sure, I guess you just find them all again, but I think

I did beat that one Pretty much like everybody else So, that's right

Well, let's listen on this serious note, which we've been serious the whole time, but We do want to share with you

Jesus the whole reason that we're having this conversation is because of him because he's enabled us to do so and And we're talking about his his return

Him him being with us him reigning and ruling now guiding us and leading us and growing his kingdom it's all about him and if if you're living your life if you're doing life

Raising your family trying to make it out there on your own Just practically as as the taste that we looked at this morning at church.

You're not gonna find rest But ultimately the rest that Jesus was talking about is rest rest for your soul spiritual rest

Eternal rest and that can only be found in Jesus Christ And and that's why we're here that's why we're talking about Bible interpretation and and that sounds weird and odd But it matters

How we study Scripture it matters The conclusions that we draw from Scripture because we're talking about the

God of the universe. We're talking about the Savior of our soul the the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and we don't want to get it wrong, even though in our humanity in our flesh

We we do and we mess up and that's why we need each other. That's why iron sharpens iron, but ultimately

First and foremost foundationally before anything else. We need Jesus Christ To be our

Savior. He's already Lord of everything But we need to submit to him as Lord personally

And we need to receive him as our Savior receive that gift of salvation and that can only come through him

We've all sinned. We've all fallen short of God's glory We've all broken his commandments even

James chapter 2 verse 10 says if we've kept the whole long even stumbled at one point We're guilty of it all.

So we we need a Savior We need someone outside of us to come in and save us and God and God sent his only begotten

Son He stepped into humanity put on sinful flesh He put on flesh his flesh wasn't wasn't sinful

I'm trying to remember the exact quote that I that I read recently in the likeness of sinful flesh or something

But but Jesus came in flesh fully God fully man

Lived a sinless perfect life Life that we could not live though.

That weight was put on us by the law by the Pharisees even by ourselves because we

We think that we're God we want to be the God of our own universe But we need to come to the realization and we need to cry out to God Revealed revealed to me my inadequacy and what

I can't do show me my sin. Show me that I've failed Because it has eternal consequences and we want you to know him and we want you to live

Enjoy in this life and in in the life to come and in the eternal state that we were talking about We don't want anyone to perish.

We want those That that are hearing the voice of God that God is drawing to to come to him in repentance and faith and so if that's you if if You are being convicted of your sin

And it may not even have been through this podcast but God has been working on you and showing in your showing you your sin

We would compel you now to before this night is over before you go to sleep

Repent of your sin and put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ, and he will grant you faith

He will grant you new life. Give you a new heart and in a new beginning a beginning that will have never have an end

Joy that will never end and so we just we we compel you to come Come to Christ tonight and then if you don't mind, would you close us in prayer sure?

Dear Heavenly Father. We thank you for tonight for giving us a chance to Discuss your word and how to interpret it that we should

Trust in your interpretations of our own that we should trust that you are not going to lead us astray

Yeah, we pray that you would Allow us to put this into practice We would all be students of your word that we remember that you have not only spoken to us through But you have really truly come and died from that pray that you would

Keep us safe Bring us on home and grow your kingdom in Jesus name we pray.

Amen Amen, thank you guys for watching or listening or however you got connected to this podcast.

We really appreciate it We appreciate your support We would like it if you would give us a like or heart a share

And join us in reaching our community for Jesus Christ And we'd like for you to remember as always that Jesus is

King so live in the victory of Christ You'll speak with the authority of Christ and continue to go out there and share the gospel of Christ.