(I wish someone could splice this into another thread. We're back to the "natural vs. spiritual" thing. I wish we'd speak of this as "literal or symbolic" rather than "literal or spiritual;" but, it probably won't happen it is so entrenched in our usage. Another mislabeling is decrying the church when it should be called Babylon, not the church which is God's girlfriend. Ah, well...)
I saw a young woman on a stage, which from a distance looked somewhat more impressive than close-up where the black paint was scuffed and dirty. She was confidently saying something to the effect that, "...by using the Bible symbolically rather that literally is central to the great deception the Bible warned was coming upon people in these last days. By trying to use what should be directly understood to instead stand for allegories they will make it say anything they want." Hearing this was so indescribably frustrating to me; but, I was just a spirit, floating horizontal to the stage at about the level of her head. I reached for her jaw as she was speaking such adversarial words without understanding. Even as I thought I couldn't affect something in the material realm, being just a spirit, I discovered to my surprise I was not only moving her jaw, but affecting her own being at a spiritual level such that she was very shaken, staggering backward with her mouth hanging open. The word that was then spoken to me was: "I will have a people who have been taught of me." This gave me great comfort.
You do know that is what racial dispensationalists teach? I've heard Hal Lindsay, John MacArthur and others say it. It is a very uninformed view that robs believers of much wealth and knowledge. Not only history of interpretation but Scripture itself bears witness to many allegories, types and symbols.
Galatians 4:21-31, (AV)...
21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
It this passage concerning the symbolic an example for emulation in additional portions of the law, a kind of key to what else God would decode to our wondering eyes or does it describe a limit?
your brother, James Rohde