Gary DeMar - Should we interpret Revelation "literally"?

from the upcoming DVD: The Harrowing of Hell

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Gary
• DeMar
• eschatology
• dispensationalism
• interpreting
• scripture
• Revelation
• postmillennialism
• worldview
• literal

[xena1973]

Dispensationalism, Pre tribulation rapture is a man made doctrine, they never stay within context of a chapter and just pull out verses to prove there view which is a pretext, and like all pre tribers they have never shown me were it says that Jesus Christ will come before the tribulation, I would like a comment or reply back.

[jcr4runner]

If a doctrine is new --

It probably isn't true.

[elegemvan1]

@jcr4runner You are right.

For example speaking in tongues is false, and so is knocking people to the floor.

[jcr4runner]

@elegemvan1

Read Tertullian in the second century on tongues. It's not a new doctrine.

Tongues has always been controversial in its administration.

The doctrine of tongues as the "evidence" of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is new.

Speaking in tongues is not unbiblical. Further, the misuse of tongues is not a primary heresy.

Forbidding tongues is unbiblical (1 Cor 14 :39).

Further "knocking people to the floor" isn't a doctrine. It's a practice.

[tempusfugit68]

Oh, and the generation that Jesus is speaking to is the ELECT of Matthew 24:31 whom the angels gather up from the four winds.

This guy keeps mentioning "context, context" yet he never follows his own advice.

[jcr4runner]

For a good discussion -- "On the "transitional verses in Matthew 24" -- you can Google that phrase and you'll find an article by Ken Gentry at The Forerunner website.

[tool2scream05]

eh... the dispensational view does not at all account fo "all these things." The Preterist view DOES in fact account for all of it, though I'm not a fan of DeMar's partial preterism, nor am i full-preterist. However, "all these things" is clearly EVERYTHING spoken of in the chapter, especially the "coming of the son of man" and the Danelielic prophecy. Which were all fulfilled in 70 AD.

[fardawg]

I understand the "LITERAL fact" that dispy's twist and add to scripture and try to separate the people of God, "either intentionally or ignorantly ", as the judaizers did, by using their "literal" approach. I don't say this to be cruel or contentious but to point out the hypocrisy that I myself was guilty of.

God Bless, and keep studying God's word and not man's 19th century tradition.

[bobeagle3]

Literal method -- is to believe that Jesus Christ is God! What do you believe about that Gary?

[HaveUconsidered]

I've already commented on this a couple of videos ago so I won't repeat myself.

I just want to add that under a preterist "method of interpretation", countless dozens upon dozens, at times whole paragraphs of prophetic text in the OT as well as Revelation are simply "spiritualized away" under the banner of "apocalyptic poetry". It all becomes subjective poetic goobly-gook.

Nothing means what it plainly says. Hundreds of texts are simply deconstructed away.

This is what cults do.

[HaveUconsidered]

The passage allows for the "this generation" phrase to be interpreted in different ways.

I believe Gary is a partial-preterist guy, correct?

And I believe that along with answering the question about the then standing temple, Jesus was also answering about His second coming, was He not?

If so, THEN GARY TOO MUST SEE THIS "THIS GENERATION" STATEMENT AS REFERRING TO THE DISTANT FUTURE!!!!!"

This kind of disingenousness drives me nuts.

[HaveUconsidered]

This is so sickingly disingenuous from Gary, I don't even know where to begin.

There is a difference between using a literal method, which is essentially the historical-grammatical method of interpretaion; a system which allows for literary devices such as symbolism, hyperbole, etc, and a literalist, which interprets everything in a wooden manner.

Dispensationalist are the former, reading text plainly. The context in most all cases will determine if the passage should be taken literally.

[jacopman]

fardawg.................I have a study Bible that has another approach to "this generation"......it says the word generation in the passage we are talking about means......."or the nation of Isreal".

If that is the case then the nation of Isreal will not pass until all these things happen.

If that is the case then the time of the second coming will happen when Isreal still exists.......which throw yet another light on this passage........

[fardawg]

I understand the "LITERAL fact" of God's judgment against apostate Israel in AD 70 as expressed by the use of the Old Testament "figures" of falling stars and cloud judgments. I understand the "LITERAL fact" of the gospel destroying the Roman Beast and all those who would stand in its way until His physical coming at the end expressed by the "figure" of Christ riding throughout the world on a white horse and coming at the end of the millennium in fire to resurrect and judge.

[fardawg]

I take Christ literally when He says, ""Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon THIS generation", "THESE stones", "all these things" happen to "THIS generation" and "when YOU see the abomination". I take Christ literally when He spoke in Revelation of the things being "near", "shortly to come to pass" "at hand", "coming soon". I take Him literally when He says that the words would Not be sealed as they were in Daniel's day because they were about to be fulfilled.