On Interpreting the Prophetic Scriptures

*Disclaimer: This is a rant about they who have studied the prophetic texts and actively try to teach them*

I am extremely zealous over this. I spend a lot of time in the prophetic texts of the Bible, and a lot of time reading various opinions on these texts. Something I’ve noticed is rampant is that the prophetic texts – especially the ones full of symbolism – are used to say whatever the person wants it to say. I’ve seen far too often verses pulled completely out of context just so that certain false doctrines could continue to be presented.

I’ll give a couple examples.

The woman in the book of Revelations is Israel – not the Church. In chapter twelve, it is Israel that flees from the dragon. How do I know this? Look at the symbolism. She is standing on the moon, her face is like the sun, and the crown on her head has twelve stars. Go back to Genesis 37 and read of Joseph’s dream where the sun, moon, and eleven stars bow down to him. This is Israel. Jump forward in Revelations 12 to where the serpent chases her. Check the Greek in verse 6. She flees to the wilderness where they will take care of her for 1,260 days. Who are the they? It is the Church. How do I know this? Go later in chapter 12 to verses 13-17. These are further details of that flight into the wilderness. What happens? The earth swallows the flood – something that is looking back to Numbers 16 where Korah is swallowed by the earth. Korah is a type of Antichrist. Who swallows the water? It is the Church. How do I know? Look at verse 17. The result is that those who obey the commands of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus are persecuted. Who are they? That is the Church – something separate and distinct from the woman.

Lets look at the two witnesses. Who are they? People want to say that they are symbolic of the whole Church. What language is used to describe them? They are two olive trees and two lampstands. This is a direct translation from the Hebrew of Zechariah 4:11. These two in Zechariah 4:11 are Joshua and Zerubbabel. Joshua and Zerubbabel are types. What do I mean by type? A type is a pattern. God is foreshadowing through the prophetic words over these two men something larger that is to happen way in the future. These men will perform miraculous plagues. In Revelations 11:6, we see these plagues are likened to Elijah and Moses. Does that mean these two are Elijah and Moses? No. Elijah and Moses are being used as patterns. Just like Elijah and Moses brought about plagues against the kingdom of darkness (see Exodus 12:12), so these two men will also plague the kingdom of darkness.

Everything in the prophetic Scriptures form together. They aren’t independent symbols that we need to “figure out” so that we can become famous because we found hidden symbolism in the Bible. The Branch is spoken of by many of the prophets. Every time, it is a reference to the messiah. There is the ominous king of the north – sometimes defined by the Assyrian, sometimes by Babylon, sometimes by another enemy of Israel, and sometimes just a shadowy figure “from the north”. Every time, it seems like the prophecy extends beyond the person being spoken of to the Antichrist that will arise at the end of the age.

This is the way that you read prophetic Scripture. You compare Scripture with Scripture, prophet with prophet, vision with vision, prophecy with prophecy, and even story with story. Many times there are patterns in the stories of the Scripture. Amalekites tried to destroy Israel when they were walking around the desert in Exodus. Later, Saul is told to destroy the Amalekites and doesn’t kill Agag. This causes Samuel to weep through the night. We find in the book of Esther that Haman was an “Agagite” – a descendant of that king of Amalek. The Amalekites have the pattern of always seeking the destruction of Israel. That is a pattern set up in the Scripture.

It is incredibly important that we learn this. King Saul was anointed by God, and yet we find at the end of his life he is possessed by demons and seeking the counsel of a witch. We find that John calls Judas who betrayed Jesus the “son of perdition” – one who was entered by Satan to betray his friend. In Psalm 55:13-14, we find David use that same language about Saul – the companion and friend is the one who betrays him. In 2 Thessalonians, we find Paul call the Antichrist the “son of perdition” – the only other time in the New Testament that this phrase is being used. This is a pattern. These men are types and foreshadowing.

What is the point of all this? If we do not want to do the digging necessary to understand the prophetic texts, we should just keep our mouths shut. That isn’t to say that I have all of the correct interpretations, but to say that when we just make up interpretations that “sound good”, we really do more damage than help. It is more beneficial when I read or listen to someone who has done their homework and they challenge my view biblically than when I’m talking to an internet infidel who doesn’t know that the prophetic words intertwine.

Context is Everything

In our current Christianity – especially in the Western World – we have learned to quote Bible verses and make Scripture references to prove our points of view. We should indeed use the Bible when considering our beliefs. But I’ve found that often the verses are pulled out of context. (By often, I don’t mean the majority of the time, but instead that it happens more than it should.) We’ll use verses like 2 Timothy 3:15-17 to ‘prove’ that the Bible is the inspired word of God, yet neglect entirely what the point of the verses were: the conclusion to the first part of the chapter, which was about those who would rise up and promote heresy and ungodly living. Yes, the verse says that the Scripture is the inspired word of God, but no, that isn’t the point of the verse.

In the New Testament times, the Jewish scholars – called rabbis – would debate the Scripture with one another. When they debated, they would quote a verse or a passage. But, when they quoted the verse or passage, they didn’t mean just that verse or passage. They knew that their opponent would know the verse, and know the context of the verse. So, they would quote the verse – sometimes part of the verse – and the other rabbi would then pull it up in their mind as to what the context is, what the chapter is about, what the book is about, and where it is located in the whole schema of the Scriptures. Out of that context, the rabbi would then know that the point being made is not simply about that one verse, but rather the whole context gives a more full and complete argument. Therefore, to respond simply to that verse would completely miss the brunt of the argument.

I try to do this in ALL of my writings. I’ll admit, I am unsuccessful. Yet, especially when I’m trying to make a point, I will use a verse or passage knowing that the context supports the argument being made. I think this is so necessary for our time. We need to be willing to dig into the texts of the Bible for multiple reasons.

First, we need to see that when Scripture is being referenced or quoted in other parts of the Bible, that reference is not simply there because they want to quote one part of a verse. The reference is there because they expect if you don’t know the verse you will look it up and see the context and get the bigger picture and the fuller argument being made.

Second, we need to dig into the Scripture so that we too can make these sorts of arguments. When we’re debating, when we’re discussing, when we’re teaching, when we’re learning, when we’re apologetic-ing – ANY time that we quote the Bible we need to use the context of that verse and make sure that it is the context making the argument and not one specific verse. It has taken me years to overcome the many verses pulled out of context (like John 3:16) that we have this “understanding” of what this verse means, and when we come to it, we read this understanding into it, but when we read up to it or after it, we understand that is the context. How many times have I seen it in myself? I’ll be tracking, and then suddenly a verse that I have quoted and known and put to memory will come up, and I’ll say, “What?!? That’s what that verse means?”

How about I give a couple of examples and then end.

“Wives, submit to your husbands…” Ephesians 5:22. I’m expecting that you know the verse, and you know the following couple verses. What comes before this verse? Do you know? Paul just finished speaking about how we’ve come out of darkness and into light. Darkness and light are metaphors for two different kingdoms. The way that Paul concludes this introductory thought is by saying, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ”. This is the verse directly before, “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” What is the context telling us? Just like everyone submits to everyone else, so too should the marriage relationship be one of submission one to another. What comes after this verse/passage? “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” This plays in perfectly with what I just said: the point is that the relationship is one of submission unto one another – the husband even submitting himself unto death on behalf of his wife! What comes after that? We find Paul giving advice to children and parents, to slaves and masters, and finally to bear the full armor of God. This passage is the commencement of Paul explaining what it means to be children of the light, who have come out of darkness. He concludes the whole thought with the “put on the full armor of God” passage.

Let us try another. “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” Matthew 7:1. What is the context? We are in the sermon on the mount, where Jesus begins with these beatitudes, basically clarifying what it means to typify the kingdom of God. Then, he gives two examples of what these traits look like: salt and light. From there, Christ tells us that He fulfills the Law (a rabbinical way of saying that He is teaching it in its purest form), and that our righteousness needs to exceed the Pharisees’. How does that happen? Jesus spends the next 13 ‘teachings’ explaining what it means. The first six are in relation to the Law and the way that we understand and obey it. The next seven are in relation to our daily lives and attitudes. At the beginning and at the end of these teachings we find the phrase “the Law and the Prophets”. This teaching on judging others is the second to last of these teachings on what it means that our righteousness should exceed that of the Pharisees. From there, Jesus explains that the gate is small, and the path is narrow that leads to life. How do we get onto this path? We live in righteousness that exceeds the Pharisees’. How do we know we are indeed on that path? Jesus explains that we will know by our fruit. Then He ends by giving the parable of two builders: one wise and one foolish. So, when we come to judging others, this is the context. We find verse 7:5 saying, “first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” Jesus is actually telling us to judge! He is distinguishing between the unrighteous judgment and the righteous judgment, though. So, 7:1 fits in with the whole context – a comparison of the two “righteousnesses” (one true, and one false) – and also stands as an introduction to what it means to righteously judge your brother.

So, in conclusion, I would highly recommend that we start seeking to understand the context of these verses and passages we quote as “proof texts”. Many false doctrines have entered the mind of believers simply because they haven’t gone and looked at the context of the verses quoted. This will save you from falling for much deception – not all – and will give you such a firm foundation in your faith. Hopefully this helped someone. God bless you all!

Is it a Goat or a Demon?

Browsing through Leviticus, I came across chapter 17 where God tells the Israelites not to eat blood. Now, it is interesting that in the letter to the Gentiles, the Jerusalem church tells them that this is one of the laws that they cannot break. Circumcision – whatever – but do not eat/drink blood. Before we reach this command in verse 10, we find verses 1-9 speaking of how the people must offer their sacrifices to the Lord at the Tent of Meeting, and not outside of the camp.

But there is something fascinating that happens in verse 7. “They must no longer offer any of their sacrifices to the goat demons to whom they prostitute themselves. This is to be a lasting ordinance for them and for generations to come.”

Wait… What?

What is a goat demon? The Hebrew word is se’irim, which simply means “hairy one”. It is used in 2 Chronicles 11:15 and Isaiah 13:21 as well. Sometimes it is translated as goat. Sometimes it is translated as Satyr. Sometimes it is simply translated as “baboon”.Some have thought that maybe these se’irim are false gods in Egypt that were “blood thirsty”, and God is saying “Don’t you indulge in that.” What in the world is going on here?

There is this weird connection between offering to the goat demon, and eating the blood. God says don’t eat blood, because the life is in the blood. When we examine Acts 15:29, we find that the things mentioned to the Gentile believers to abstain from are the very things that were used at times to worship false gods. Do not eat sacrifices offered to idols. Do not eat the meat of strangled animals. Abstain from sexual immorality. Sandwiched in the middle is this command to not eat blood. So, it seems likely that this is indeed one of those things that would have been performed as a ritual when sacrificing to a certain false deity.

Jump ahead to 1 Corinthians. Paul is talking to these believers, and he says to them “about eating food sacrificed to idols…” that “food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.” Then, to top it off, Paul says, “If anyone… sees you… eating in an idol’s temple, won’t he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge.” This dialogue is found in 1 Corinthians 8.

Jump ahead in 1 Corinthians to chapter 10. Paul makes the statement to “flee from idolatry”, and then wraps that intimately with communion. Then, if that weren’t confusing enough, he flips the subject around and says, “Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? Do I mean that sacrifices offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons.”

What just happened? One minute Paul seems to say that it isn’t a big deal to eat of the sacrifices offered to demons – which is deliberately against what the Jerusalem counsel said – and then in chapter 10 it seems like he starts back-peddling. Might I suggest that what is being expressed is bigger than just meat offered to idols? The whole point isn’t about the meat, nor about the idols. The point goes beyond this to a deeper truth. It is about what the communion itself means.

Communion with the Lord is about marriage to God. When the Jewish people would become “engaged” (truthfully, the courtship of the ancient Israelites was much more than what we would call engagement), the father would go with his son to the woman’s home. They would speak to the father of the woman, and they would try to work out a marriage pact. Then, at the end of it all, the son would take a cup and fill it with wine. He would say over the cup, “This is my blood of the covenant. Take and drink of it.” The daughter will then have an option: take the cup and accept marriage with God, or politely decline. When we take of the cup of the Lord, we are committing ourselves to marriage with Him. Jump back to Leviticus 17. Notice the language is about harlotry when the Israelites would offer to this “goat demon”.

We have before us two tables. There is the table of the Lord, which is a covenant between God and His people of marriage with them. Then, there is the table of demons, which is a covenant with death and hell solemnly sworn against the Lord.

To the table of the Lord, we find verses like Genesis 14:18, where Melchizedek brings wine and bread to break with Abraham. We find Psalm 78:19, where God spreads a table in the wilderness for Israel. We find in Mark 8:4, where the disciples ask Jesus, “Where will we get enough bread to feed all these people in this remote place?” In Ezekiel 20:35, the prophet speaks of a time still yet in the future when Israel would be scattered into the wilderness of the nations and sup with God face-to-face. Revelation 12:6 speaks of a time where the woman (Israel) flees into the wilderness to a place that God has prepared to take care of her for 1,260 – another prophecy that is most likely future. It is spoken of this communion that unless you eat Jesus’ flesh and drink His blood, you cannot be His disciple.

Then there is another table. There is a contrast. Psalm 14:4 speaks of evil doers who “devour my people as men eat bread”. Jeremiah 10:25 prophecies of a wrath to be poured out on all the nations and people who “have devoured Jacob; they have devoured him completely and destroyed his homeland.” But the most blatant of all these Scriptures is in Micah 3. “Listen, you leaders of Jacob, you rulers of the house of Israel. Should you not know justice, you who hate good and love evil; who tear the skin from my people and the flesh from their bones; who eat my people’s flesh, strip off their skin and break their bones in pieces; who chop them up like meat for the pan, like flesh in the pot?”

What is the point? There is somehow a direct connection between taking the meat sacrificed to idols – joining in the table of demons – and devouring the people of the Lord. There are few things that God says He will cut the people off for. This is one. Another is the blaspheme of the Holy Spirit. Thirdly there is taking the mark of the beast. I believe that all three of these are connected deeply and intimately. Notice Matthew 12:28 that Jesus compares the Spirit of God with the kingdom of God – “If I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.” Then, Jesus goes on to express that the strong man – Satan – must be bound in order for the Kingdom of God to come. Then, Jesus goes back to the subject of the Spirit of God by saying those who blaspheme the Spirit of God will not be forgiven. Why? Because the Spirit of God is the one that is casting out the kingdom of darkness. The Spirit is being likened to the kingdom of God. To say that the work of the Spirit is actually the work of Satan is the ultimate affront.

The book of Revelations contrasts the seal of the 144,000 with the mark of the beast. To one, the mark of God is put upon their forehead. To the other, it is the mark of the beast upon the forehead. What is the difference? They who see the antichrist and will actually claim this man is God is to equate the kingdom of God with the kingdom of darkness. It is the same as they who blaspheme the Spirit – which is the same as they who will feast at the table of demons. Look at Luke 11:20. The same verse in Matthew 12 that compares the Spirit of God with the kingdom of God is said in Luke 11:10 “If I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”

This phrase is found in Exodus 8:19. The Egyptians see the plagues as the “finger of God”. What is happening? The contrast is being made: Egypt or Israel? Goat demons or Jehovah? The Spirit of God or the false miracles performed by the false prophet? Jesus or the Antichrist? The kingdom of God or the kingdom of darkness? Which do you choose?

A Link to my Other Blog

I have moved to Wordpress, but continue to post blogs here from time to time. Anyone who is subscribed, please check out my wordpress at:

tjustincomer.wordpress.com

God bless you all who read this, and may you continue to find deeper revelation of the truth within our God and Father through His Son, amen.