Showing posts with label biblical interpretation. Show all posts

How Should We Read the Book of Revelation?

How do you read Revelation? Is it a mystical document that tells the story of the end of the world? Is it a cryptic document that John uses to clothe his message to struggling Christians? Is it a timeless document that has a mixture of both? And I guess you could have a few other options as well.

I once believed it was a mystical document giving us clues to the end of the world. I have since changed my view. I think John had a particular message to the people of his day. John knew what he was writing and he knew what this vision meant. Once my view changed the pendulum began to swing too far the other way into a cryptic document that explained events that have very little to do with the future. This is where I am today—tomorrow this might change:

History tends to repeat itself. Therefore, is it possible that Revelation describes relevant history for John’s people but also relevant history for people throughout the centuries? I tend to read Revelation as the ongoing cosmic reconciliation that is taking place with its ultimate culmination in the victory of Christ over all. In a way I think it has the same message that we have been discussing in Ephesians: God redeems broken people and a broken world. It meant that to John’s audience and it means that to us.

Will there be more intense persecution as we close out the chapters of this book and open up the pages of the next? Certainly. Will there be a literal end times Antichrist? Perhaps. Is John foretelling of a one-world economic system? Maybe, but I do not think that Revelation is about John looking into a crystal ball and trying to explain in his terms what he saw. Again, the Book of Revelation, in my opinion, is about “uniting all things in him, things in heaven, and things on earth.”

What do you think?

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati

How do you interpret Colossians 1:24?

"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church..."

There are quite a few different ways of looking at this text. What is it that is "lacking in Christ's afflictions"? And, how exactly is Paul "filling up" that which is lacking?

Sam Storms does a great job of narrowing the discussion, you can read the full thing here.

The six options are thus:

  1. Redemptive: Paul is somehow filling up what is lacking in Christ's redemption
  2. Glorifying: Paul is giving more glory to Christ through his suffering
  3. Typological: Paul's suffering is corresponding to the suffering of Christ
  4. Eschatological: There is a set amount of suffering that Christians will endure, Paul is filling up that bucket of suffering with his suffering.
  5. Extending: Ministers, like Paul, extend the message of the suffering servant to others through their suffering in ministry. Christ is not lacking in propitiation but in presentation. Therefore, Paul is extending the presentation of Christ, through suffering, to the nations.
  6. Union Suffering: Paul is suffering where Jesus would have as an example and encouragement to benefit the Colossians.

Maybe you have a seventh or a combination of a few of these. I would be interested to hear your suggestions. Read Storms' article first.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 3/27-04/01

Ligonier Ministries celebrates April Fools Day with an interesting topic: Did Jesus Ever Laugh?

Absolutely brilliant post from Brent at Colossians 3:16. As one that is attempting to change an anti-intellectual culture, this article really hits home. Why It's Arrogant to Say, "Just give me the Bible..."

One of the most oft questions asked of me, is how were the people in the OT saved. Terry Rayburn discusses this question today, find his answer here.

Abraham Piper gives us 6 reasons that pastors should blog. He also desires for your thoughts and suggestions.

C.J. Mahaney has interviewed Sinclair Ferguson. Last week I linked to the first two parts, now parts 3, 4, and 5 are available.

Challies reviews Young, Restless, and Reformed. I have to get this book, as well as the Harris' brothers' Do Hard Things.

Why is asking of the Bible, "what does this mean to me", dangerous? C. Michael Patton tells us, and I agree.

One of the most often cited passages in support of contextualization is Acts 17. Phil Johnson discusses Paul at Mars Hill.

This is a wonderful quote on worry from Ed Welch's book Running Scared: "Worriers are visionaries minus the optimism." (HT: Josh Harris)

Last week I linked to Dr. Galyon's series on Packer's points of Calvinism. Today we are treated Packer's Third Point.

It seems like whatever Michael Patton posts I link to. Nonetheless, you also need to check out this series on The Problem Passages of Scripture, Part 1.

Nathan Finn gives a Baptist Look at the Lord's Supper.

(HT: Purgatorio)

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati