@JonEricson, I attempted an edit on this Q; however, I am concerned it still is proof texting which I believe is off-topic. So, I thought I might run it by someone else. Feel free to delete my comments if they fall short as well.
If there's one thing that drives me nuts about my fellow Christians, it's how we sometimes are so certain that some prophecy is associated with some historical event. It reminds me of the Midianite soldiers who dream about barley bread and say, "Surely this can be none other than the sword of Gi...
^^^ does this mean that questions should not ask about the referent of symbols in apocalyptic/eschatalogical literature (such as the book of Revelation), or just that answers should not go past the time period of the time of writing to find a referent (i.e. Babylon = USA), or something else altogether? Thoughts? (I'm not sure what to make of this)
@jas3.1 since you wrote the current top answer, care to weigh in?
or perhaps we need more folks to weigh in on this question
it is a confusing answer since it says, "questions about whether entity X is the true fulfillment of Prophecy Y are off-topic" and then proceeds to give examples of that that are considered acceptable
@JackDouglas depending on how you interpret that, exegetically could mean not reading anything into the text it doesn't say (i.e. you couldn't say the USA = Babylon since USA is not in the text and thus can't be drawn from it, which is the literal meaning of 'exegetical')
but as some interpret it, you can make the text say anything you want as long as you claim you are doing exegesis....
it's another undefined term that carries no clear meaning here
"This is that", when there is no "rational" connection between the "this", and the "that".
When that takes place withing the bounds of scripture (e.g., 1 Cor 10:4b, or 1 Peter 1:25b), that is Scripture, and part of the world of those who wrote the Bible.
The problem comes when "this" and "that" get linked in the post-biblical period -
because this has been a mode of reading that has been going on for a long, long time.
Herder, Hegel, Kant, Schleiermacher ... frankly, I'd rather do Hebrew.
Oh - and I meant to say, my thoughts on "pesher" were the reason for the initial pointer to the Longenecker article from Tyndale Bulletin - should have clarified that earlier.
