Date:   1/18/2017 7:02:40 AM ( 7 y ago)
Hits:   1,780
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=2351106

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

OK guys & gals, over here now please, and I think I managed to read the last few posts in the end. You have certainly been busy lately, haven't ya?

@ refreshed - To conclude re. Hosea & Gomer, my pastor is also a 'Finalist' (I know, pick y/self up off the floor, right?), and he has this to say on the subject:

Thank you for the question!  I have struggled with this one, and people in church history have taken different views on it.  On balance I think that he really was asked to marry her.  There is no hint in the text that it is just a metaphor; it’s recounted as an event.  The names given to the children are highly symbolic.  It’s been suggested that they are part of what is an allegory.  But many names in the OT are given to be symbolic, including in the prophets (e.g. Isaiah 7).  

It is possible that Gomer was not unfaithful at the point of marriage, but that the statement “Go and take to yourself an adulterous wife" is spoken after she has committed adultery, and is taken to play to the whole marriage.  BUT, I think the LORD does ask him to marry an untrustworthy woman.  Hosea wasn’t just going to learn to think of Israel’s sin against God as adultery against him.  He was going to feel what God felt like: the betrayal, the anger, the jealousy and the undying love.  (It is similar to the emotional intensity of Ezekiel’s prophetic loss of his wife in Ez. 24).

So as you can see, my dear friends, it is simply not the case that Finalists 'spiritualize' everything out of existence on a mere whim. We also accept what the Bible says at face value, but if that's all we did, we would miss out on so much.

Case in point: For the record, I also believe that Jonah was historical. But don't forget it's deeper meaning - Mt 12:40. And without the benefit of Heb.7, who would have guessed the true significance of Gen. 14:17-20? Elijah was a real prophet, but he was also a prophecy (or perhaps slightly more accurately, a 'type') in his own right (Mal. 3:1; 4:5-6 and Mt 17:9-13). The list goes on, and these deeper meanings have filled entire volumes. E W Hengstenberg, arguably one of the greatest (if not the best) evangelical scholars of the 19thC, would not have been able to write his monumental 'Christology of the Old Testament' without these deeper meanings. If you ignore this aspect of revealed truth, you impoverish your own source of real spiritual food.

@ vektek - The thread was cross-posted on the Conspiracy forum coz, if you recall, the OP was about Prince Harry being identified as the antichrist. As this entails a certain level of 'conspiracy' to pull off, I though it only apropo to cross-post there as well. As it's now become almost exclusively a debate about interpretation, end-times, etc., I have now removed it from the Conspiracy Forum.

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=2351106