I know - hardly original - but it was still hard to resist. Anyroad, enough frivolity for now.
In a recent thread on another forum, my good friend Bryan Cruz proudly trotted out the hoary old chestnut about his use of the historical-grammatical hermeneutic when interpreting prophecy. Considering it was penned half a century ago, Arthur Carver's brilliant riposte to that argument could almost be considered prescient, were it not for the fact that he does no more than state the blindingly obvious.
This is just the first part of what I hope will be a series of 5 or 6 parts (maybe more) devoted specifically to this vitally important topic. And all courtesy of Carver's blistering tour de force through some of the most dramatic interpretations of the O.T. you are ever likely to encounter this side of eternity.
So without further ado, here is Part I for what will hopefully be your delight and, more importantly, edification: