Quote: Originally posted by Wannabee
You've jumped to interpretation. It's part of it, but not the first step.
| Don't wanna (short for...) jump the gun here. What's the first step? OK, never mind. I went back and read what you wrote in another post:
Application is 100% dependent upon interpretation.
Interpretation is 100% dependent upon the meaning.
The meaning is 100% dependent upon exegesis.
And proper exegesis is 100% dependent upon good valid hermentical principles. Quote: Originally posted by Wannabee
All the books of the Bible were addressed to someone (s or pl) at the time. That doesn't mean that they're not applicable to us today. This argument could be used against any of the epistles.
I wouldn't say that each church represents an era so much as to point out that each church in Revelation does represent, at least to some degree, present day churches. In other words, if the shoe fits then pay attention.
| Using the dispensational hermeneutic, you seem to have come to a different conclusion than others in the dispensational camp. Can you show how you use your hermeneutic to come to your conclusion? Are those dispensationalists that conclude that each letter represents a different part of the church age using the same hermeneutic as you? Why the differences?
[Edited on 5-27-2006 by blhowes]
__________________
Bob Howes
Framingham, MA
A reoccurring thought:
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
|