" Our Kingdom is not of this world ,but will be in this world ,encompassing the universe, and many other places we know not of . Earth will be the centre of God's Kingdom "
Just a few thoughts on Mr. Wright's message on Revelation. This phrase came to mind, "Alas, alas how the faithful city has become a HARLOT." A study of Israel's relationship with God will lead us to understand that when Israel was unfaithful to God, she "played the HARLOT." From this we should conclude that the HARLOT of Revelation cannot be Rome for she was NEVER married to God as was Israel. And so when she becomes the HARLOT, she has the "Ichabod" pronounced over her and the "glory of God" lifts off of the temple. Where once the presence and glory (kabod) dwelt; a light to all, it is replaced with the spirit of Bablylon and thus she is relegated to BABYLON: a religious structure full of perversions and babblings, unable to access the heavens because of her unfaithfulness. Jesus said, "It is written 'My house shall called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.'" And being the "HARLOT" and "BABYLON," and now the "LAND beast" (Israel was called the land) she is allied with the "SEA beast"(Rome the gentiles were the sea) and so becomes "SODOM and EGYPT where our Lord was crucified." They cry out, "We have no king but Caesar. Crucify! Crucify!" Revelation is but a divorce proceeding with the required "stoning and burning" for the HARLOT and also the story of a marriage to God's beautiful betrothed: the Jerusalem from above, adorned as a bride coming down out of heaven. The letter is sealed with two time stamps, lest we should attempt to push all or parts of it into some distant foggy future, "Blessed is the one reading, and those hearing the words of the prophecy, and keeping the things having been written in it; for THE TIME IS NEAR." Rev.1:3 and “Do not seal up the words of prophecy in this book, because THE TIME IS NEAR." Rev.22:10
That's just something I was considering on my own.But after a few more months of study I have come to accept the orthodox (partial) preterist view that Jerusalem is primarily who the book of Revelation is about, covering roughly a seven year period straddling 70 a.d. But what is interesting is that whole 'world system' of that time underwent a series of devastating destructions over roughly a 20 year period. Rome included. And then once you study the utter moral rot that was Pompeii, well . . .
To the person who asked the last question about if Christians should lead in political offices I have a question. Is it more weighty in God's eyes to lead for a few fleeting years in this temporal life or to teach upcoming pastors and/or to shepherd a congregation/believers with their leadership taking the weight of eternal salvation? Which of those leadership roles has more at stake? If the leader in this temporal world gets it wrong it can be corrected by the next leader, if the biblical scholar/seminary professor or pastor gets it wrong it has eternal consequences for the ones they influenced...
I have gone to churches for seminars on prophecies. My problem is that if these were only for the very end of the earth,then how can the book of Revelation be a blessing to the church through the centuries? What ever the interpretation, it must hold blessings and encouragement for each generation of believers since Christ returned to His Father. None if the interpretations I ever heard does that. The church would just say that these prophecies are for the future and has nothing to do with us. Also, there are too many scriptures which are left out of the interpretations. Only the joining of heaven and earth, the returning Christ with all believers dead and alive joining Him in the air and coming here fits. Why would He come to establish His reign for just a thousand years. Where are the answers to all of God’s promises concerning this earth? Tim Mackie also sees Revelation and the prophecies differently than the accepted belief. I think of how the Jews misinterpreted the prophesies of the Messiah’s first coming and they missed Him, and murdered Him. The most accepted interpretations seem always to be wrong. This is a Spiritual book. We need a different mind set and new eyes to see beyond the accepted views. Thankfully, wrong eschatology will not keep us out of the wedding feast of the Lamb. God will bring about the end in His time and in His way. Be ready is our part in every generation.
The Book of Revelations does not suggest it must be interpreted literally. Never and nowhere. In fact, it's quite the opposite, since many times (as in chapter 17) it gives us the interpretation of its own symbolism. It's possibly the least literal book in the Bible.
where did you hear this interpretation? If it's not a bother, i would like to find out more about this interpretation of yours. Is there any video on youtube i can watch that has this teaching? It sounds very interesting to me in the way you explain it.
Or ... number five .. we could say that Babylon is the "great city" (Rev. 14:18) -- where where also our Lord was crucified (Rev. 11:8) that is Jerusalem, which was attacked by Nero (the Beast) and literally did fall in John's day.
@@patrickdewhurst3378 so you think they've given an honest consideration? Well I'd be very surprised that they hadn't heard of it but he doesn't seem to even acknowledge the idea.
@@williambrewer Oh very likely. You don’t do the depth of research they do over the amount of time they do without being exposed to the varying viewpoints. If I’m honest, I don’t take the view that Jerusalem was Babylon. However, I was surprised that it wasn’t even mentioned as it’s certainly a very viable option. Now whether or not it’s been given full due consideration, who knows? But sometimes the more entrenched we get in a position the easier it is to disregard other perspectives outright. I hope that isn’t the case, but the alternative is the Dr. NT Wright is oblivious to one of the main perspectives on Babylon which I highly doubt. 🤷🏽♂️
Its always been the minority view and Babylon = Rome seems like its an older view. There is the 1 Peter reference to that is thought to be referring to Rome.
Earth,= Domain,Kingdom,Reign of Lucifer. In Jesus= Earth Regained = New man, New Heavens and Earth ,= New Creation = Christ 's Reign = Kingdom come on Earth as it is in Heaven = The Lord's prayer coming to be .
Lol who knows! Probably another metaphor. Pastor Steven Anderson for the other extreme interpretation of Revelation (very good) Michael Heiser for something in between.
He is postmillennial. So he believes that the church will bring the world to Christ and that is the millennium. The Son returns for his people after the millennium.
It is unfortunate that here, in the West, we tend to label the various camps and points of view and then proceed to dismiss all aspects of what they teach and believe in order to hold high the camp that we belong to. I don’t agree with more than a few things that N.T. Wright believes, but I think he has made significant contributions to the study of theology and I do appreciate the way he connects the narrative of the gospel that weaves throughout every book of the Bible into one cohesive and unifying theme because it powerfully depicts the permeating power of God’s Spirit throughout history, all humanity and His church that is broader than we’ve perceived it to be and not merely limited to our specific season in time. Also, because our ultimate hope as Christians is the restoration and renewal of every aspect of creation for His glory and we can be assured that He is already reigning and ruling over our ultimate enemies which are spiritual and not merely physical. So, even when ‘bad things’ are happening to us and others we love we can rest in the knowledge that He is at work even through the pain and suffering and has promised to use even that to our good and His ultimate glory! Also, if our message about the gospel is only something that we have to look forward to when we die then where is the abundant life that He promised us in the present? If future is all there is to good news then what does our surrounding culture have to gain in this life by turning to Him in this messy and painful life? Anyway, I do believe that there is a very good reason why Tom’s broad sense of The Gospel connects so well to our culture today; it focuses on news that really is good for the here and now and in the darkest places of our painful and empty lives! This is truly ‘Good News’ and not just wishful thinking; it allows us to re-frame our trials and suffering in the light of a much bigger gospel than we generally see in our Western church culture and that is likely why the church is hemorrhaging people in our culture today.
every time i hear Wright on the garden/city i wonder why he does not include Jacques Ellul's profound book The Meaning of the City - does Wright not adopt elluls insight?
I see this as a challenge for Christianity eschatology I believe that the beast Antichrist and tribulation is yet to come. In essence I am a PreMillenniumist Jesus is coming! There will be Judgement and Justice He will reign for a thousand years. I believe that the prophets show various blue prints of what is to come in history. Please consider the battle is not against flesh and blood but principality and powers.
Not a bad liberal interpretation, but the book of Revelation itself says that it should be interpreted literally. It says in Rev. 1 that the 7 stars are the seven angels of the 7 churches, which means that the symbols have a literal meaning that God expects us to figure out.
They would make way more money in the corporate world as a CEO or as a Psychologist. Or as a teacher at any University of the many other subjects they are experts in.Such as; several langue's both ancient and modern, World History, anthropology, creative writing, journalism, debate, public speaking, logic, Greek Mythology, philosophy, economics, and business to name a few. Just go to the Harvard Seminary site and look at the prerequisites for a PhD in Theology.
I think what Wright has done is to continue to unravel a ball of string which he long ago found the end of and has patiently continued to work at for many years. I don't think that he ever would have found that crucial terminus in the first place if he had been a liberal theologian.
We have all seen the results of self proclaimed ministers and modern day prophets. The mega Churches and millionaire Christians claiming to be super blessed by God. Lets get on board with the God of peace. Don't throw out everything the Scholars teach. NT Wright is speaking about a God who loves the world. The judgment or final judgment may or may not come in this generation. How can I live for Jesus now and what world view will help express the purpose of God through Jesus now ? We may have different gifts but we as Christians must have the same motivate. What motivates us to live a Christ centered life? If the end of the world by World Famine, War, the taking over of the Beast and the death of anyone believing in Jesus after the Rapture motivates us, then do we usher it in and hope it happens ? I hope not. If that is what caused you to believe will you then defend that position as a matter of faith? To someone who started there walk believing this dooms day view of the book revelation it may seem like heresy to believe that we should pray for peace on earth or thy kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven. It may not be as exciting. But it will hold up. In the long run.
True Thinker, There are two completely divergent views in Christianity regarding this topic. The view you were familiar with versus this view he teaches. They are completely different and cannot be reconciled. His viewpoint comes out of the Catholic/Anglican tradition. He is trying to explain it to help people think a little more deeply. Once people decide which view they can accept, they can move on to what he calls their "vocation." Which is laboring to bring justice to earth now.
As far as a theo.ry, NT ie. New Testament was also for Jews, and ending of their Old temple. Gospelors went to World's end struggling against Anti-Christ's as victory until a New universe.
I'm a fan of N. T. Wright, but his "take" on the Revelation disappointed me. Assuming that "Babylon" symbolizes Rome creates the kind of questions Wright (and others) have trouble with, such as, If "the end" is coming soon why didn't Rome fall in the first century? I believe Babylon in Revelation is not Rome, but Jerusalem -- the seat of power of the religious institution that was principally responsible for persecuting Christians .And, indeed, Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70.
Spot on. Tom was doing really well till he tripped up on missing Covenantal Jerusalem as the harlot, (Jerusalem the arch-typical 'harlot' occurs over X 50 times in two chapters Ezek 16 and 23) and the later NT prophets as a unity with the former OT Covenantal prophets. Still, he is so eloquent, thoughtful, and learned he is a delight to hear. He needs to rejig Rome with Jerusalem to maintain the integral unity of his argument.
NT is correct. 2 Peter refers to Babylon (Rome). Daniel's visions defines the 4th kingdom we know as imperial Rome. The preterist view of Jerusalem has it's points. But I reject that on two points. It is a strong point that Jerusalem was written in 95AD. I tried to believe 66AD, but could not allow the evidence. Second is the nature of the beast in Rev being political, and an economic power, with Babylon a religious apostacy. The Jews were judged for their unbelief and rejection of Christ, not their adulteries, IMO. Daniel is about 70 AD and the judgment upon Jerusalem. The 7 seals in Rev OPEN and parallel Daniel,and represent the fall of Jerusalem. The Trumpets "WARN" the church of the 2nd coming judgment, of which, 70 AD was a picture (Matt24). Rev 12-13 is Dan 7 and the Holy Roman Empire and abuse of the Pope. The false Prophet... not sure, but likely the USA, per the SDA model. So when we get to Rev 17, it is future, 7 kings: Egypt, Asseria, Babylon. Medo-persia, Greece, (5 fallen), Rome (one still is, #6), #7 yet to come - Holy Roman Catholic Church, (Also beast of the sea, rev 13) gets a deadly wound (Falls from power near 1800), is #8 in the form of Babylon the great. All BEASTs are directed by Satan.
Coming "soon" did happen in 70 AD with the opening of the 7 seals, a fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy that was sealed... but Rev can also be about more.
I appreciate some of things about transformation NT Wright has said about the church bringing heaven here on earth however revelation pictures something quite different for the people of God. Instead of the church bringing in a utopian government it will be persecuted by a religio-political power just before the parousia. I am confused that he seems to ignore all the reference to crisis and martyrdom so prevalent in the book of Revelation. I am at a loss to understand how he can read Revelation without regards to the OT allusions which should be used to interpret the book.
he lost me at the idea that the blood of the prophets was spilled in *_Rome_* .... Jesus makes sure we understand *_"it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem_* (Luke 13:33)
If we are to not articulate a time line of the history of man's rule up until Christ's return, awaiting the consumation. On what ground can one say, Christ's victory on Calvary is the actual "MIDPOINT" of history. Midpoint indeed. Even the "fourth day" of the "week", as it were understood by those heeding Peters concern for the Saints not being ignorant of atleast that one thing.
For as we know, by those Prophets of old, that God has told us the end from the beginning. And by the Apostles that his apparent slackness, scoffed at by worldlings, is longsuffering towards man. Mercy, leaving the door open, to let the stragglers in. If only whosoever will, would. A giant chaiasmus of His-story. Pivoting on the hill of Calvary, where the pinnacle of history saw justice and mercy kiss and salvation for humanity IS realized.
@jcr4runner This is absolutly correct, Rev. 11:8 startles the thinking of most dispasastionalists. Consider also that harapolis was a city in the Roman empire where either tribute was paid to ceasar upon entry and a mark placed upon your hand in order to buy or sell or if you entered the city and refused you were crucified. Nasty!
I appreciate what N. T. Wright has brought to the table about the way he reads Revelation. However I am at a conundrum when it comes to his use of symbolism without regards to Old Testament allusions as a foundation to interpret what John is getting at in Revelation. I believe to not see the beast as a religio-political power as pictured in Daniel misses the point of John's symbolic representation drawn from Daniel 7 little horn. Antichrist sits in the temple of Christ as Christ in Paul's 2Thess. 2 "man of sin" If we are to read Revelation from a first century mindset we must take into account what those OT and NT allusions called to mind when they first heard them.
I did not misunderstand. You misused it. Of course symbols mean something real; that's why they're symbols in first place. That's not what "literal" means. If you listen closely what N. T. Wright is saying, you will find nothing of liberal in his interpretation, and nothing that violates the symbolism auto-interpreted by the book itself. But, of course, you should in first place check his commentary on Revelation, instead of making so fast a judgement based on so short a presentation.
Regarding NTW's 'new heaven and new earth' and the hope of 'life after life-after-death': A spiritual body in a spiritual heaven is good enough for me. I don't expect to be there (in the Most Holy Place) longing for a physical add-on. Of course, if that's what God wants to do, I'm all for it. I note, however, when a nation is conquered and destroyed by a foreign army, the Bible sometimes portrays this tragedy in the highly figurative apocalyptic language of the destruction of heaven and earth. The fall of Babylon (Isaiah 13:9-13), Israel (Jeremiah 4:23-26), Egypt (Ezekiel 32:7-9) and Edom (Isaiah 34:4-5) in the sixth century B.C. are all depicted together with the destruction of heaven and earth. (Confession: I haven't watched it all, but I did read his book a while back, and perhaps he satisfactorily handles this objection to what I'm presently seeing as excessive literalism.)
I understand your point. But rather than 'excessive literalism', don't you think it would better fit as the rule and proper way to see it when we take into the equation factors and variables such as Colosians 2. 1-23; 3. 1-4; 1 Corinthians 15. 1-58; Romans 8. 1-26; etc,. Then, the most logical result of our taking in 'these factors and variables' is to understand that, if we are to fully participate into Christ's fully divine/fully human nature by resurrect as he did resurect, these Heavens and Earth ought to somehow be destroyed. (Perhaps we don't fully comprehend the full extension and meaning of the pauline words 'For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? And so many others...) Christ, for instance, died (hishuman body was somehow destroyed) just to be raised from the dead. In othe words the grain died in order the plant would live? In the other passages I mentioned, one actually sees how this reality works somehow in two dimensions one that seems clumsely abstract and the other 'excessively literal' by being...well literal?
Anglicanism in Britain has a vested interest in "The kingdom on Earth" as it is tied up in the British Monarchy and has influenced the country in the past. One only has to look at the ridiculous hymn "Jerusalem" that is sung consistently throughout Anglican churches in England. Wright will always try to prove that earthly rulers should "bring about" the kingdom through earthly means.
I am afraid N. T. Wright is not reading Revelation correctly because he ignores the contextual battle found in Revelation 12 which depicts the war against the people of God throughout the church's history leading up to the final battle with the remnant which takes place at the end prior to the second coming.
You misunderstand literal. If the book gives us the interpretation, then it has an actual, factual interpretation, which also turns out to have a literal meaning. The symbols mean something literal. The heads represent five fallen incarnations of the beast, the ten horns are ten literal kings, not ten myths or ten ideologies, but ten KINGS that represent ten nations that will join forces, thus creating the final incarnation of the beast; a revived Islamic empire; etc.
And the new heaven earth will have more or less spiritual qualities, like the worlds right now where Jesus and the saints are: they are completely spiritual
NT Wright believes that revelation is a collections of utopian literature, that is well meant, but that will never come to past in actual terms. And he goes around and around never having the courage to say that straight.
I'm afraid your own subjective, therefore very personal disliking of Rev. Wright, is numbing you rather severely; that or you just have some severe deficit of attention. 'Utopian literature'? All {the time }during this conference he either left it implied or said it explicitely, that it is NOT utopian. Perhaps this is why you never found an explicit 'utopian' acknowlegment in it. In other words, you all alone where moving your head round and round in circles expecting to see an inexistant dog that was going round and round in circles as you where listening to him.
Tom Wright keeps speaking that the new heaven-earth will be somewhat positioned here ; however i cannot agree, because Peter clearly states that this whole dimension and all its elements will be destroyed by heat and fire. Obviously the new heaven-earth will be i am sorry Mr Wright , in the spirit realm as you oppose this idea, but taking the Bible in its totality, this is where all logic leads. The resurected body will be spiritual
+Mil. Gan. The spirit realm has no physical bodies. God is Spirit. The Son took on a body. He said to Thomas, "touch me and put your hand in my side, I am flesh and bone". As you yourself stated, Paul says in 1 Cor 15, we are resurrected with a spiritual body.....the key word being "body". There is a fleshly, mortal body that will die, and a spiritual immortal body that we are resurrected unto that will never die.....but a body nonetheless. Job stated "though my body see corruption, in my flesh I will see God".
+Mil. Gan. Two things here: First, "spiritual" in the New Testament doesn't mean immaterial; it means motivated by the Spirit. Paul's contrast in 1 Corinthians 15 isn't between a material and a non-material body; it's between a body animated by the "self" or individual "soul" (psyche) and the body given life by the Spirit. Both of these bodies could be "material." Second, regarding the phrase in 2 Peter, "the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up." In the Bible, "heaven and earth" are the witnesses to the covenant (see Deuteronomy 30:10 and elsewhere), so the passing of the old "heaven and earth" and its replacement by a new "heaven and earth" does not signify a cosmic change, but a change in the covenant between the Lord and his people. Also, in biblical language the word "earth" also means "land," which from the Israelite-Jewish perspective refers principally to the land of Israel. Peter is saying that the "land and its works," i.e. the Judean homeland dominated by a distortion of Israelite faith, will be "burned up." This happened, literally, with the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple by the Romans in the rebellion of AD 66-70.
nt wright is a good man. However, he really gets out there in terms of intellectual nonsense. He should just say that Revalations is a crazy book about nothing.
Christ never spoke of his Divinity as person called himself son of man. Its scholars and people first council nicene creed 325 who put all the theological thoughts about death resurrection divinity in books. So many have written books and given talks debates that world obsesed with it. What did christ say faith he who believes in me never die. Yet all words he used are analyised but not understood. If believe in ressurection and faith why need books debate what was once past be renewed how when up to god not people try understand by debates and books. As christ said will come like thief in night be prepared. There no affirmed divinity by christ only what written faith spirituality down his teachings what he said not from scholars which interpret rubber stamp own thoughts for money aswell. New hope christanity just does not fall on christians any one welcome my fathers table
wrong "son of man" is a Messianic allusion from Daniel. That title was one He alone called Himself. When Christian writings in the early years never call him that. So it is a confirmation that he really did use that self given title. There is no evidence that this was a title reinserted by scribes. When the Pharisees asked Him who he was, the last thing He confirms is that title. And that was the confirmation they were looking for in order to condemn Him to the cross.
I am not intending to offend you by what I am about to say, however it is necessary for me to say it: Your set of mind (and therefore your comment ) is either one of a person who has 35 five points of IQ? or one of a Jehova Witness who are afraid of thinking? in either you would fit you are simply blind to all the richness of the inefable glory of the Gospel of Christ. Theology can be seen as the 'applied method' of proper understanding and concieving God, Christ, His Word, etc. In spite Theology is a science, it doesn't mean it doesn't come from God and Christ and the Spirit themselves, rather, it only means what science is means and is difined, which is: the amount of systematichaly ordained knowledge about something. Thus, it is not about money, it is about how to interpret correctly (that is in a christly way) what Bible says, for instance, if you would have read some good books of theology you would understand correctly those passages you where referring of. Besides, what does that has to do with the video above?
Thank you Tom. You have given much food for thought. I love your big picture approach.
After hearing much from NT Wright, RC Sproul and Bruce Gore, I'm convinced dispensationalism got it wrong.
" Our Kingdom is not of this world ,but will be in this world ,encompassing the universe, and many other places we know not of . Earth will be the centre of God's Kingdom "
NT is brilliant and relevant. I prefer a historical fulfillment of prophecy rather than an idealist/spiritual, but he has great depth.
Just a few thoughts on Mr. Wright's message on Revelation. This phrase came to mind, "Alas, alas how the faithful city has become a HARLOT." A study of Israel's relationship with God will lead us to understand that when Israel was unfaithful to God, she "played the HARLOT." From this we should conclude that the HARLOT of Revelation cannot be Rome for she was NEVER married to God as was Israel. And so when she becomes the HARLOT, she has the "Ichabod" pronounced over her and the "glory of God" lifts off of the temple. Where once the presence and glory (kabod) dwelt; a light to all, it is replaced with the spirit of Bablylon and thus she is relegated to BABYLON: a religious structure full of perversions and babblings, unable to access the heavens because of her unfaithfulness. Jesus said, "It is written 'My house shall called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.'" And being the "HARLOT" and "BABYLON," and now the "LAND beast" (Israel was called the land) she is allied with the "SEA beast"(Rome the gentiles were the sea) and so becomes "SODOM and EGYPT where our Lord was crucified." They cry out, "We have no king but Caesar. Crucify! Crucify!" Revelation is but a divorce proceeding with the required "stoning and burning" for the HARLOT and also the story of a marriage to God's beautiful betrothed: the Jerusalem from above, adorned as a bride coming down out of heaven. The letter is sealed with two time stamps, lest we should attempt to push all or parts of it into some distant foggy future,
"Blessed is the one reading, and those hearing the words of the prophecy, and keeping the things having been written in it; for THE TIME IS NEAR." Rev.1:3 and “Do not seal up the words of prophecy in this book, because THE TIME IS NEAR." Rev.22:10
That's just something I was considering on my own.But after a few more months of study I have come to accept the orthodox (partial) preterist view that Jerusalem is primarily who the book of Revelation is about, covering roughly a seven year period straddling 70 a.d. But what is interesting is that whole 'world system' of that time underwent a series of devastating destructions over roughly a 20 year period. Rome included. And then once you study the utter moral rot that was Pompeii, well . . .
Wow!
Where can I read the papers presented and the responses to them?
To the person who asked the last question about if Christians should lead in political offices I have a question. Is it more weighty in God's eyes to lead for a few fleeting years in this temporal life or to teach upcoming pastors and/or to shepherd a congregation/believers with their leadership taking the weight of eternal salvation? Which of those leadership roles has more at stake? If the leader in this temporal world gets it wrong it can be corrected by the next leader, if the biblical scholar/seminary professor or pastor gets it wrong it has eternal consequences for the ones they influenced...
Wow, this video made me think a-lot. It challenged the way i view eschatology - in a good way.
Thank you for sharing the video. "+"' God bless
I have gone to churches for seminars on prophecies. My problem is that if these were only for the very end of the earth,then how can the book of Revelation be a blessing to the church through the centuries? What ever the interpretation, it must hold blessings and encouragement for each generation of believers since Christ returned to His Father. None if the interpretations I ever heard does that. The church would just say that these prophecies are for the future and has nothing to do with us. Also, there are too many scriptures which are left out of the interpretations. Only the joining of heaven and earth, the returning Christ with all believers dead and alive joining Him in the air and coming here fits. Why would He come to establish His reign for just a thousand years. Where are the answers to all of God’s promises concerning this earth? Tim Mackie also sees Revelation and the prophecies differently than the accepted belief. I think of how the Jews misinterpreted the prophesies of the Messiah’s first coming and they missed Him, and murdered Him. The most accepted interpretations seem always to be wrong. This is a Spiritual book. We need a different mind set and new eyes to see beyond the accepted views. Thankfully, wrong eschatology will not keep us out of the wedding feast of the Lamb. God will bring about the end in His time and in His way. Be ready is our part in every generation.
The Book of Revelations does not suggest it must be interpreted literally. Never and nowhere. In fact, it's quite the opposite, since many times (as in chapter 17) it gives us the interpretation of its own symbolism. It's possibly the least literal book in the Bible.
where did you hear this interpretation?
If it's not a bother, i would like to find out more about this interpretation of yours. Is there any video on youtube i can watch that has this teaching?
It sounds very interesting to me in the way you explain it.
43:38 that’s the start of a very powerful statement
Or ... number five .. we could say that Babylon is the "great city" (Rev. 14:18) -- where where also our Lord was crucified (Rev. 11:8) that is Jerusalem, which was attacked by Nero (the Beast) and literally did fall in John's day.
31:20 have these guys even heard the theory that Babylon was Jerusalem!? How can these big names like N.T. Wright have missed it!?
I wouldn't say they've missed it, rather they don't see it as a valid perspective.
@@patrickdewhurst3378 so you think they've given an honest consideration? Well I'd be very surprised that they hadn't heard of it but he doesn't seem to even acknowledge the idea.
@@williambrewer Oh very likely. You don’t do the depth of research they do over the amount of time they do without being exposed to the varying viewpoints. If I’m honest, I don’t take the view that Jerusalem was Babylon. However, I was surprised that it wasn’t even mentioned as it’s certainly a very viable option.
Now whether or not it’s been given full due consideration, who knows? But sometimes the more entrenched we get in a position the easier it is to disregard other perspectives outright. I hope that isn’t the case, but the alternative is the Dr. NT Wright is oblivious to one of the main perspectives on Babylon which I highly doubt. 🤷🏽♂️
@@patrickdewhurst3378 okay, you may be right.
Its always been the minority view and Babylon = Rome seems like its an older view. There is the 1 Peter reference to that is thought to be referring to Rome.
Will do, thank you =)
Earth,= Domain,Kingdom,Reign of Lucifer.
In Jesus= Earth Regained
=
New man, New Heavens and Earth ,=
New Creation = Christ 's Reign =
Kingdom come on Earth as it is in Heaven = The Lord's prayer coming to be .
What does N T Wright think of the Millennium?
probably a postmillennialist
Lol who knows! Probably another metaphor. Pastor Steven Anderson for the other extreme interpretation of Revelation (very good) Michael Heiser for something in between.
He is postmillennial. So he believes that the church will bring the world to Christ and that is the millennium. The Son returns for his people after the millennium.
It is unfortunate that here, in the West, we tend to label the various camps and points of view and then proceed to dismiss all aspects of what they teach and believe in order to hold high the camp that we belong to. I don’t agree with more than a few things that N.T. Wright believes, but I think he has made significant contributions to the study of theology and I do appreciate the way he connects the narrative of the gospel that weaves throughout every book of the Bible into one cohesive and unifying theme because it powerfully depicts the permeating power of God’s Spirit throughout history, all humanity and His church that is broader than we’ve perceived it to be and not merely limited to our specific season in time. Also, because our ultimate hope as Christians is the restoration and renewal of every aspect of creation for His glory and we can be assured that He is already reigning and ruling over our ultimate enemies which are spiritual and not merely physical. So, even when ‘bad things’ are happening to us and others we love we can rest in the knowledge that He is at work even through the pain and suffering and has promised to use even that to our good and His ultimate glory! Also, if our message about the gospel is only something that we have to look forward to when we die then where is the abundant life that He promised us in the present? If future is all there is to good news then what does our surrounding culture have to gain in this life by turning to Him in this messy and painful life?
Anyway, I do believe that there is a very good reason why Tom’s broad sense of The Gospel connects so well to our culture today; it focuses on news that really is good for the here and now and in the darkest places of our painful and empty lives!
This is truly ‘Good News’ and not just wishful thinking; it allows us to re-frame our trials and suffering in the light of a much bigger gospel than we generally see in our Western church culture and that is likely why the church is hemorrhaging people in our culture today.
He is amillennial.
every time i hear Wright on the garden/city i wonder why he does not include Jacques Ellul's profound book The Meaning of the City - does Wright not adopt elluls insight?
I see this as a challenge for Christianity eschatology I believe that the beast Antichrist and tribulation is yet to come. In essence I am a PreMillenniumist Jesus is coming! There will be Judgement and Justice He will reign for a thousand years. I believe that the prophets show various blue prints of what is to come in history. Please consider the battle is not against flesh and blood but principality and powers.
But as a whole i like listening to him;
I like listening to John Piper
Not a bad liberal interpretation, but the book of Revelation itself says that it should be interpreted literally. It says in Rev. 1 that the 7 stars are the seven angels of the 7 churches, which means that the symbols have a literal meaning that God expects us to figure out.
What would theologians do for a living if there were no theologians to listen to them?
They would make way more money in the corporate world as a CEO or as a Psychologist. Or as a teacher at any University of the many other subjects they are experts in.Such as; several langue's both ancient and modern, World History, anthropology, creative writing, journalism, debate, public speaking, logic, Greek Mythology, philosophy, economics, and business to name a few. Just go to the Harvard Seminary site and look at the prerequisites for a PhD in Theology.
I think what Wright has done is to continue to unravel a ball of string which he long ago found the end of and has patiently continued to work at for many years. I don't think that he ever would have found that crucial terminus in the first place if he had been a liberal theologian.
The spirit of C.S. Lewis lives.
We have all seen the results of self proclaimed ministers and modern day prophets. The mega Churches and millionaire Christians claiming to be super blessed by God. Lets get on board with the God of peace. Don't throw out everything the Scholars teach. NT Wright is speaking about a God who loves the world. The judgment or final judgment may or may not come in this generation. How can I live for Jesus now and what world view will help express the purpose of God through Jesus now ? We may have different gifts but we as Christians must have the same motivate. What motivates us to live a Christ centered life? If the end of the world by World Famine, War, the taking over of the Beast and the death of anyone believing in Jesus after the Rapture motivates us, then do we usher it in and hope it happens ? I hope not. If that is what caused you to believe will you then defend that position as a matter of faith? To someone who started there walk believing this dooms day view of the book revelation it may seem like heresy to believe that we should pray for peace on earth or thy kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven. It may not be as exciting. But it will hold up. In the long run.
True Thinker, There are two completely divergent views in Christianity regarding this topic. The view you were familiar with versus this view he teaches. They are completely different and cannot be reconciled. His viewpoint comes out of the Catholic/Anglican tradition. He is trying to explain it to help people think a little more deeply. Once people decide which view they can accept, they can move on to what he calls their "vocation." Which is laboring to bring justice to earth now.
As far as a theo.ry, NT ie. New Testament was also for Jews, and ending of their Old temple. Gospelors went to World's end struggling against Anti-Christ's as victory until a New universe.
It's grave Mistake if they'd deny that and counted with all those already found Faithfuls 70AD?!
Enjoyable
I'm a fan of N. T. Wright, but his "take" on the Revelation disappointed me. Assuming that "Babylon" symbolizes Rome creates the kind of questions Wright (and others) have trouble with, such as, If "the end" is coming soon why didn't Rome fall in the first century? I believe Babylon in Revelation is not Rome, but Jerusalem -- the seat of power of the religious institution that was principally responsible for persecuting Christians .And, indeed, Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70.
Spot on. Tom was doing really well till he tripped up on missing Covenantal Jerusalem as the harlot, (Jerusalem the arch-typical 'harlot' occurs over X 50 times in two chapters Ezek 16 and 23) and the later NT prophets as a unity with the former OT Covenantal prophets. Still, he is so eloquent, thoughtful, and learned he is a delight to hear. He needs to rejig Rome with Jerusalem to maintain the integral unity of his argument.
Laudemont Press you think like the Jews in Jesus day who did not accept Him as Messiah.
Those things in purpose aren't destroyed but transferred to Jesus and His body.
NT is correct. 2 Peter refers to Babylon (Rome). Daniel's visions defines the 4th kingdom we know as imperial Rome. The preterist view of Jerusalem has it's points. But I reject that on two points. It is a strong point that Jerusalem was written in 95AD. I tried to believe 66AD, but could not allow the evidence. Second is the nature of the beast in Rev being political, and an economic power, with Babylon a religious apostacy. The Jews were judged for their unbelief and rejection of Christ, not their adulteries, IMO. Daniel is about 70 AD and the judgment upon Jerusalem. The 7 seals in Rev OPEN and parallel Daniel,and represent the fall of Jerusalem. The Trumpets "WARN" the church of the 2nd coming judgment, of which, 70 AD was a picture (Matt24). Rev 12-13 is Dan 7 and the Holy Roman Empire and abuse of the Pope. The false Prophet... not sure, but likely the USA, per the SDA model. So when we get to Rev 17, it is future, 7 kings: Egypt, Asseria, Babylon. Medo-persia, Greece, (5 fallen), Rome (one still is, #6), #7 yet to come - Holy Roman Catholic Church, (Also beast of the sea, rev 13) gets a deadly wound (Falls from power near 1800), is #8 in the form of Babylon the great. All BEASTs are directed by Satan.
Coming "soon" did happen in 70 AD with the opening of the 7 seals, a fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy that was sealed... but Rev can also be about more.
CHRISTIANS TAKING ACTION ."There's a better way to be human. "
I appreciate some of things about transformation NT Wright has said about the church bringing heaven here on earth however revelation pictures something quite different for the people of God. Instead of the church bringing in a utopian government it will be persecuted by a religio-political power just before the parousia. I am confused that he seems to ignore all the reference to crisis and martyrdom so prevalent in the book of Revelation. I am at a loss to understand how he can read Revelation without regards to the OT allusions which should be used to interpret the book.
he lost me at the idea that the blood of the prophets was spilled in *_Rome_* .... Jesus makes sure we understand *_"it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem_* (Luke 13:33)
If we are to not articulate a time line of the history of man's rule up until Christ's return, awaiting the consumation. On what ground can one say, Christ's victory on Calvary is the actual "MIDPOINT" of history.
Midpoint indeed. Even the "fourth day" of the "week", as it were understood by those heeding Peters concern for the Saints not being ignorant of atleast that one thing.
For as we know, by those Prophets of old, that God has told us the end from the beginning. And by the Apostles that his apparent slackness, scoffed at by worldlings, is longsuffering towards man. Mercy, leaving the door open, to let the stragglers in. If only whosoever will, would.
A giant chaiasmus of His-story. Pivoting on the hill of Calvary, where the pinnacle of history saw justice and mercy kiss and salvation for humanity IS realized.
The new man will see immortality, not the old man. Maybe this is true.
@jcr4runner This is absolutly correct, Rev. 11:8 startles the thinking of most dispasastionalists. Consider also that harapolis was a city in the Roman empire where either tribute was paid to ceasar upon entry and a mark placed upon your hand in order to buy or sell or if you entered the city and refused you were crucified. Nasty!
I appreciate what N. T. Wright has brought to the table about the way he reads Revelation. However I am at a conundrum when it comes to his use of symbolism without regards to Old Testament allusions as a foundation to interpret what John is getting at in Revelation. I believe to not see the beast as a religio-political power as pictured in Daniel misses the point of John's symbolic representation drawn from Daniel 7 little horn. Antichrist sits in the temple of Christ as Christ in Paul's 2Thess. 2 "man of sin" If we are to read Revelation from a first century mindset we must take into account what those OT and NT allusions called to mind when they first heard them.
I did not misunderstand. You misused it. Of course symbols mean something real; that's why they're symbols in first place. That's not what "literal" means.
If you listen closely what N. T. Wright is saying, you will find nothing of liberal in his interpretation, and nothing that violates the symbolism auto-interpreted by the book itself. But, of course, you should in first place check his commentary on Revelation, instead of making so fast a judgement based on so short a presentation.
Regarding NTW's 'new heaven and new earth' and the hope of 'life after life-after-death': A spiritual body in a spiritual heaven is good enough for me. I don't expect to be there (in the Most Holy Place) longing for a physical add-on. Of course, if that's what God wants to do, I'm all for it. I note, however, when a nation is conquered and destroyed by a foreign army, the Bible sometimes portrays this tragedy in the highly figurative apocalyptic language of the destruction of heaven and earth. The fall of Babylon (Isaiah 13:9-13), Israel (Jeremiah 4:23-26), Egypt (Ezekiel 32:7-9) and Edom (Isaiah 34:4-5) in the sixth century B.C. are all depicted together with the destruction of heaven and earth.
(Confession: I haven't watched it all, but I did read his book a while back, and perhaps he satisfactorily handles this objection to what I'm presently seeing as excessive literalism.)
I understand your point. But rather than 'excessive literalism', don't you think it would better fit as the rule and proper way to see it when we take into the equation factors and variables such as Colosians 2. 1-23; 3. 1-4; 1 Corinthians 15. 1-58; Romans 8. 1-26; etc,. Then, the most logical result of our taking in 'these factors and variables' is to understand that, if we are to fully participate into Christ's fully divine/fully human nature by resurrect as he did resurect, these Heavens and Earth ought to somehow be destroyed. (Perhaps we don't fully comprehend the full extension and meaning of the pauline words 'For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? And so many others...) Christ, for instance, died (hishuman body was somehow destroyed) just to be raised from the dead. In othe words the grain died in order the plant would live? In the other passages I mentioned, one actually sees how this reality works somehow in two dimensions one that seems clumsely abstract and the other 'excessively literal' by being...well literal?
It wasn't Rome Babylon it was Jerusalem " where lord was crucified " he wasn't crucified in Italy smh and jerusalem was doomed in 70 ad
Anglicanism in Britain has a vested interest in "The kingdom on Earth" as it is tied up in the British Monarchy and has influenced the country in the past. One only has to look at the ridiculous hymn "Jerusalem" that is sung consistently throughout Anglican churches in England. Wright will always try to prove that earthly rulers should "bring about" the kingdom through earthly means.
Ben Sutherland I haven't sung Jerusalem in any of the Anglican Churches of which I've been a member in the last 30 years!
He is not post-millenial, he's Amillennial. Perhaps more positive than most amil
I am afraid N. T. Wright is not reading Revelation correctly because he ignores the contextual battle found in Revelation 12 which depicts the war against the people of God throughout the church's history leading up to the final battle with the remnant which takes place at the end prior to the second coming.
You misunderstand literal. If the book gives us the interpretation, then it has an actual, factual interpretation, which also turns out to have a literal meaning. The symbols mean something literal. The heads represent five fallen incarnations of the beast, the ten horns are ten literal kings, not ten myths or ten ideologies, but ten KINGS that represent ten nations that will join forces, thus creating the final incarnation of the beast; a revived Islamic empire; etc.
do you eat fish?......you have to grab hold of the skirt of aJEW savy?
And the new heaven earth will have more or less spiritual qualities, like the worlds right now where Jesus and the saints are: they are completely spiritual
Nonsense. What's the point of speaking of a new earth if it's completely spiritual? What's your scriptural basis for this claim?
Go read Romans 8 a few times
Kendrick Lamar money, sex, murder in our DNA
And no, it's not at all a liberal interpretation.
Revelation*. Sorry.. just a pet peeve of mine.
NT Wright believes that revelation is a collections of utopian literature, that is well meant, but that will never come to past in actual terms. And he goes around and around never having the courage to say that straight.
I'm afraid your own subjective, therefore very personal disliking of Rev. Wright, is numbing you rather severely; that or you just have some severe deficit of attention. 'Utopian literature'? All {the time }during this conference he either left it implied or said it explicitely, that it is NOT utopian. Perhaps this is why you never found an explicit 'utopian' acknowlegment in it. In other words, you all alone where moving your head round and round in circles expecting to see an inexistant dog that was going round and round in circles as you where listening to him.
Tom Wright keeps speaking that the new heaven-earth will be somewhat positioned here ; however i cannot agree, because Peter clearly states that this whole dimension and all its elements will be destroyed by heat and fire. Obviously the new heaven-earth will be i am sorry Mr Wright , in the spirit realm as you oppose this idea, but taking the Bible in its totality, this is where all logic leads. The resurected body will be spiritual
+Mil. Gan. The spirit realm has no physical bodies. God is Spirit. The Son took on a body. He said to Thomas, "touch me and put your hand in my side, I am flesh and bone". As you yourself stated, Paul says in 1 Cor 15, we are resurrected with a spiritual body.....the key word being "body". There is a fleshly, mortal body that will die, and a spiritual immortal body that we are resurrected unto that will never die.....but a body nonetheless.
Job stated "though my body see corruption, in my flesh I will see God".
I agree Contemplate. We will have bodies but quite different
+Mil. Gan. Two things here: First, "spiritual" in the New Testament doesn't mean immaterial; it means motivated by the Spirit. Paul's contrast in 1 Corinthians 15 isn't between a material and a non-material body; it's between a body animated by the "self" or individual "soul" (psyche) and the body given life by the Spirit. Both of these bodies could be "material." Second, regarding the phrase in 2 Peter, "the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up." In the Bible, "heaven and earth" are the witnesses to the covenant (see Deuteronomy 30:10 and elsewhere), so the passing of the old "heaven and earth" and its replacement by a new "heaven and earth" does not signify a cosmic change, but a change in the covenant between the Lord and his people. Also, in biblical language the word "earth" also means "land," which from the Israelite-Jewish perspective refers principally to the land of Israel. Peter is saying that the "land and its works," i.e. the Judean homeland dominated by a distortion of Israelite faith, will be "burned up." This happened, literally, with the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple by the Romans in the rebellion of AD 66-70.
Laudemont Press Excellent.... it seems only those who have dismissed dispensationalism can properly read scripture.
The earth will be destroyed by fire the same way it was once destroyed by water. It will not cease to exist but will be renewed
or else
Pp
When you spiritualize, all you have is spiritual lies.
nt wright is a good man. However, he really gets out there in terms of intellectual nonsense. He should just say that Revalations is a crazy book about nothing.
Christ never spoke of his Divinity as person called himself son of man. Its scholars and people first council nicene creed 325 who put all the theological thoughts about death resurrection divinity in books. So many have written books and given talks debates that world obsesed with it. What did christ say faith he who believes in me never die. Yet all words he used are analyised but not understood. If believe in ressurection and faith why need books debate what was once past be renewed how when up to god not people try understand by debates and books. As christ said will come like thief in night be prepared. There no affirmed divinity by christ only what written faith spirituality down his teachings what he said not from scholars which interpret rubber stamp own thoughts for money aswell. New hope christanity just does not fall on christians any one welcome my fathers table
wrong
"son of man" is a Messianic allusion from Daniel.
That title was one He alone called Himself. When Christian writings in the early years never call him that. So it is a confirmation that he really did use that self given title. There is no evidence that this was a title reinserted by scribes.
When the Pharisees asked Him who he was, the last thing He confirms is that title. And that was the confirmation they were looking for in order to condemn Him to the cross.
I am not intending to offend you by what I am about to say, however it is necessary for me to say it: Your set of mind (and therefore your comment ) is either one of a person who has 35 five points of IQ? or one of a Jehova Witness who are afraid of thinking? in either you would fit you are simply blind to all the richness of the inefable glory of the Gospel of Christ. Theology can be seen as the 'applied method' of proper understanding and concieving God, Christ, His Word, etc. In spite Theology is a science, it doesn't mean it doesn't come from God and Christ and the Spirit themselves, rather, it only means what science is means and is difined, which is: the amount of systematichaly ordained knowledge about something. Thus, it is not about money, it is about how to interpret correctly (that is in a christly way) what Bible says, for instance, if you would have read some good books of theology you would understand correctly those passages you where referring of. Besides, what does that has to do with the video above?
Phillip what exactly are you saying?
Jesus is God.