I Contribute to a Screwball Award Winning Site!
Apologist J.P. Holding of Tekton Apologetics Ministry has awarded one his coveted Screwball of the Month Awards to a site I write for, GotQuestions.org. The disputed page reads thus:
The amillennial view comes from interpreting unfulfilled prophecy differently than how non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted. Non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted literally or normally. But according to the amillennialist, unfulfilled prophecy is to be interpreted allegorically, or non-literally. This is called using a dual hermeneutic. Hermeneutics is the study of the principles of interpretation. The amillennialist assumes that all unfulfilled prophecy is written in symbolic or figurative language. Therefore, the amillennialist will assign different meanings to those parts of Scripture than the normal, contextual meanings of those words.
The problem with interpreting unfulfilled prophecy allegorically is that this allows for a wide range of meanings. Unless you interpret Scripture in the normal sense of how written language is interpreted, there won’t be One meaning. Yet God, the ultimate author of all of Scripture, did have One specific meaning when he gave Scripture to be written to the human authors. Though there may be many applications to life from a passage of Scripture, there is only one meaning, and that meaning is what God intended it to mean. Also, the fact that fulfilled prophecy was fulfilled literally is the best reason of all for assuming that unfulfilled prophecy will also be literally fulfilled. The prophecies concerning Christ’s first coming were fulfilled literally. Therefore, prophecies concerning Christ’s second coming should also be expected to be fulfilled literally. For these reasons, an allegorical interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be rejected and a literal or normal interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be adopted. [source]
Well, I can’t say that I agree with the passage’s argument. I believe that prophetic visions, such as Revelation, are allegorical symbols with keys in other Scriptures. The writers are arguing for the Tim LaHaye school of thought, which, ironically, does utilize the double hermeneutic. For example, we ascribe a meaning of one year to a day in the vision of Daniel’s seventy weeks. However, when discussing the Antichrist’s rule in Revelation, the same idea of forty-two months is described as forty-two literal months.
Why the double hermeneutic? Revelation is clearly using the same symbolic language of Daniel. Isn’t it infinitely more likely that we’re talking about a reign of forty-two prophetic months, or 1,260 years? This is also applied to the creatures of Revelation: the Beast is a man, but the demon-locusts are literal demon locusts. Again, why the double hermeneutic? Either we’re talking about a great hulking beast and demon-locusts, or we’re talking about a man and an earthly army described by the symbols on the locusts.
But, I digress. I had always hoped to steer clear of the dubious Screwball Award, however indirectly I may have earned one. In this case, a flub in someone else’s eschatology posted on a ministry I associate with.
Obviously, we both can’t be right. I can only humble myself before God and pray that He shows which one of us is in error, swiftly, so that we (as teachers and defenders of His word) do not lead others astray.
But, I am proud to say, that Jerry from I Talk to God won a website award, and that I nominated him for it! So this month, I actually contributed to both sides of the Screwball Awards. Isn’t that a happy day?
