|
Retrobyter -> RE: is the stage being set for confrontation? (10/21/2008 12:10:44 PM)
|
Shalom, A_Name_Written.
quote:
ORIGINAL: A_Name_Written
Revelation tells us that the waters of the Euphrates will be "dried up". It also tells us that waters have a symbolic meaning, "people, tongues, nations". Ok, knowing that the angel TELLS JOHN that "waters" represents something other than H2O, how do we know that the "waters" which are to be dried up of the Euphrates isn't telling us that maybe the REGION of the Euphrates will be deprived of NATIONHOOD. Think for a moment people; look for a future literal fulfillment of a river drying up, or an in your face fulfillment of a nation losing soverign rule. Lastly, neither Russia, the Chinese, nor the Persians, would be stopped because of a river. Just take a look at a map. Between Russia and Israel there is rough terrain, mountains, and several water ways; between Persia and Israel there is the Tigris and the Euphrates, and a HUGE desert; between China and Israel there are SEVERAL water ways, several nations, a HUGE desert, and rough terrain. COME ON NOW; in this day and age, what military general is so stupid as to have his troops go over these land routes, which will take days, allowing the enemy (Israel) plenty of time to prepare. That makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. You are defending a ludicrous scenario based on a literal interpretation, where a literal interpretation is SO OUTDATED!!!
I'd like to add, with regard to the "waters" of the Euphrates being "dried up" to make a way for the Kings of the East; think about it, the Persians would have never been in a position to wage any sought of war on Israel as long as Iraq, it's greatest enemy, remained soverign. With Saddam gone, and Iraq controled by Shiites, Iran (the Kings of the East? MAYBE?) has no impediment between them and Israel !!! Something to think about, MAYBE?
Okay, you MIGHT be right about "a region deprived of nationhood," but rivers may also be diverted or dammed up to allow for dry ground where a road might go. Just because "waters" were said to represent "peoples" in one place of Revelation does NOT mean that it must represent "peoples" EVERYWHERE the word occurs! That's a dangerous precendent that can cause all sorts of misfires in the interpretation of Scripture. It's similar to the way "leaven" has been treated in typology (or should I say "typolatry," "the WORSHIP of types" instead of "the study of types?"):
Leaven has been said so long and so often to be a "type of sin," that some folks can't see it as representing anything else! Yet, I know of one location, however, where it would be better to approach the parable with an open mind: Matthew 13:33 says,
Matt 13:33
33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
KJV
I really don't know anyone who would want to say that "the Kingdom of heaven is like unto sin!" So, in this particular case, to say that the leaven of this verse should be a type of sin is, IMO, just wrong.
Even in analogies, sometimes you have to leave certain elements of the analogy to be literally interpreted. Otherwise, the comparisons of the analogy have no anchors and your analogy could float away! For instance, if I said that something was "hard as nails," and then proceeded to mention the fact that steel could melt with sufficient heat, what did that do to my original comparison? Analogies and allegories have their place WITHIN the method of literal interpretation, but to give them free reign is dangerous.
Especially in the book of the Revelation of Yeshua` the Messiah (Jesus the Christ), one must be extremely careful with what is to be taken literally and what is to be taken symbolically, as a simile or a metaphor. Wherever it is pointed out directly, you are safe. Where the words "like" or "as" are employed, you are safe, but in the case of metaphors and more covert symbolism, one should probably hedge his/her bet! For instance, in the case of the seven-headed beast, you're probably right to see it as symbolism. However, in the case of the scorpion-tailed locusts of chapter 9, I can see these creatures as literal insects which had been trapped underground since the days of Noach's global Flood! I do NOT see them as "demons" or symbols representing anything else. They are what they are.
In this particular case, we are not told that the waters of the Euphrates River, a real river in Mesopotamia that extends all the way up the east side of the Fertile Crescent through the land of Syria all the way into Turkey, represent peoples. To the contrary, the river itself is a very REAL river that is a very REAL obstacle to land travel from the Eastern nations. Perhaps what they are trying to do is avoid going through Syria altogether! As far as the four "angels" bound in the river, the word "angel" itself is a word to which we have given a more fable-like interpretation. The word simply means "messenger" and doesn't always have to be a "spirit" creature! "Messengers" can refer to HUMAN messengers or even normally inanimate objects sent--or hurled--as messengers, such as the "star" (Greek: aster) in Rev. 9!
Hope this helps.
Retrobyter
|
|
|
|