Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Bro Blume,
If you say the literalists want to be literal to the 'T' then to be fair you would have to say those who take things spiritually should take things spiritually to the 'T'.
|
I said what I did because literalists tell me they take everything literal unless it is impossible for it to be taken literally. We propose that we are only meant to take literal what is specifically explained to be literal. This throws an entirely different light on the issue of Revelation. Revelation is a book of visions that follow seven letters to seven churches. We take all the visions symbolically, since
Rev 1:1 says they "signify" - or are symbolic. So to say we must take everything symbolic if literalists must take everything literally is missing our qualifier that states the visionary elements alone are symbolic.
Anyway, what is your response specifically to the thought of ALL EYES seeing Jesus? We seem to read criticism of what we say, but we never read an alternative interpretation about what the critics believe, themselves. Is every eye "every eye" or not?
Threaded Mode
