Defcon Warning System We are currently at Defcon 3

[Rudy]

Indiana Militia at Defcon 3 for what it's worth.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Sure!

I believe the emblems all through Revelation are to be spiritually interpreted, and not literally. Revelation begins by explaining that very truth.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

The term "signified" means betokened or symbolized. It is through the use of signs that Revelation relates to us the manifestation of Jesus Christ. Its SIGN-IFIED. To signify is to give a sign and to indicate . It is to betoken. So what we are told right up front is that the visions of the Book of Revelation are symbols of actualities.
Agabus SIGNIFIED through the Spirit about trouble coming.

Acts 11:28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

What did Agabus do in order for the Bible to say that he "signified" future events? Let us look elsewhere in the Bible to see if Agabus did anything similar to SYMBOLIZING something. The same prophet is later spoken about in Acts 21 and we read that he once again SYMBOLIZED something about Paul, and in doing so he used SYMBOLS of Paul's girdle to indicate bondage Paul would enter into in Jerusalem.

Acts 21:10-11 And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus. And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.

Obviously the SIGNIFYING in Acts 11:28 was similar in his use of foretelling something through SIGNS as he foretold Paul's bondage by binding Paul's hands and feet with his girdle, for this is how Agabus ministered.

I really like this. This is powerful. It is interesting to note as well, that Jesus shared mostly through parables, signs and stories... while not always explicitly stating what was going to happen, but showing a picture or an illustration of the message of what He was teaching and then providing the interpretation later.

Originally Posted by mfblume

Some say that this approach to Revelation causes one to believe that there is no coming mark of the beast, and that it is an error of spiritualizing everything away. They feel that if we do not believe in a literal stamp or mark on the literal hand or forehead of a person, then we do not believe what the Bible says. But the error of their thinking is that they are totally unaware of the symbolism taken from the Old Testament for the mark. If we were to use their reasoning when looking at the Bible, we would have to believe that the mountains literally sprouted legs like rams, and skipped across the territories according to the Psalms. That is taking things literally. But of course we are not meant to take that Psalm's reference to mountains and hills skipping to be literal. So the argument that we are to take things literally unless specified to do otherwise is simply manifesting ignorance of biblical literature.

Don't let someone gloss over these things and tell you that it is erroneous spiritualizing away of the truth to say that Revelation, for example, is not symbolic. It is not spiritualizing anything away when you are careful to look to the BIBLE ALONE AND ITSELF to understand the symbols used in Revelation.

Of course the Bible is to be taken literally at times. But we do not choose which is literal and which is allegorical. The Bible does that itself. In the book of Revelation, where we are told that the revelation was SIGNIFIED when it was given. Just as Agabus signified Paul's bondage using the symbols of his girdle (Rome would not bind Paul with his girdle!), Revelation is full of symbols. And some have stated we should by default take Revelation literally, and only take Revelation symbolically when it says it is symbolic. If that were the case then we should literally believe that Jesus turned into a lamb with seven eyes and seven horns, because the Revelation does not say "THIS IS SYMBOLIC OF JESUS OUR PASSOVER." But the truth is that the Revelation should foremost be taken symbolically EXCEPT for the instances in which the symbols are explicitly explained, because we are told to read it as such in the very first verse of the book.

For example:

Revelation 17:9-10 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Above, the Revelation distinctly interprets for us.

Also, here:

Revelation 21:9-10 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

The SYMBOL of the City descending out of Heaven is interpreted explicitly as the BRIDE.. the Lamb's wife. That is the Church!

Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

What I meant was the natural applications are gone since the cross, and only spiritual applications occur now.

I brought this point up with some friends who believe that the Feast of Tabernacles is celebrated in order to look forward to the day when the Feast of Tabernacles will be celebrated in the New Jerusalem.

You could have heard a pin drop in the room when I brought up Rev. 21:9. They said they would have to study on it more (which means they will go back to their leader and see what spin he will put on it, of course).

The New Jerusalem is the bride of Christ, Rev.21:9 explicitly states so.

Sometimes one can look at the forest so hard, that you can't see the trees.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

So, to sum:

God made His tabernacle to be with men ever since the Incarnation and Redemption brought to the world at Pentecost. There is no future fulfillment of this.

But experiencing this reality in perfect, eternal form, is not yet complete, or fulfilled, until we, as the church, experience the redemption of our bodies in the Resurrection, and enter into the heavens forever.

Yes! Jesus sent the Comforter to live within us, or God tabernacling with men, and so we, the church, have become the fulfillment of the tabernacle that dwelt in the wilderness, which is why the veil of the temple was torn at Calvary.