Why Agabus's prophecy about the famine was "signified."

[thethinker]

TO ALL,

I started a thread showing that the word "signified" in Revelation 1:2 is proof that the Book of Revelation is NOT literal. The prologue explicitly says that the book was "signified." The word "signified'' means "to indicate by a sign" and nothing more. But much to my surprise I was taken to task by a fellow Preterist on my treatment of the Greek word "semaino" (signified).

I have answered that person as much as I am willing to. I don't want to spend my time here engaging with my fellow Preterists. I want to engage with the Futurists. I want now to expound more on Luke's statement which says that Agabus "signified" that there would be a great famine, what that means and why it was necessary for Agabus to "signify" about the famine rather than just prophesy in plain speech.

Here is the scripture:

And in these days prophets came from Jerusalem to Antioch. 28 Then one of them, named Agabus, stood up and signified by the Spirit that there was going to be a great famine throughout all the world, which also happened in the days of Claudius Caesar.

Acts 11:27-28

Before I get into it I want to give the definition of the word "signify" by TWO eminent scholars of the past. One was a Full Preterist and the other was a non-Preterist.

Full Preterist Milton S. Terry of the, 19th century:

The word signified (semaino) suggests that this heavenly revelation was communicated through signs and symbols and how God sent and symblolized is indicated  in chapters v-x, where the sealed book of divine mysteries, seen on the hand of God, is taken by the Lamb, and, the seals having all been opened by him, it is given as a little book to John, and eaten by him so as to become a word of prophecy to many peoples.

Biblical Apocalyptics, page 275.

Non-Preterist Herschel H. Hobbs of the 20th, century:

The method employed in the Revelation is seen in the word "signified." This translates the Greek vverb semaino, meaning to show in signs or symbols....

It employs symbols to those who read with understanding. But it also CONCEALS the message from those outside the Christian fellowship....

The aorist form of "signified" sums up the whole method of revelation in the book. We cannot say that some things are symbols and some are literal. If one part is literal, all parts are literal. THE VERB FORM SAYS THAT ALL PARTS ARE SYMBOLIC.

The Cosmic Drama pages 24-25

Hobbs was both the leader and leading theologian of the Southern Baptist Convention

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/02/us/herschel-h-hobbs-88-southern-baptist-leader.html

I want to talk specifically about Hobb's statement on how a word that is "signified" is intended to "CONCEAL the message" from those who were outside the Christian community.

The reason Agabus's prophecy about famine was "signified" rather than given in plain speech was to CONCEAL the coming calamity from those who were the objects of God's judgment. The judgment was about to come upon that generation of Israel who had rejected the Messiah. Famine was indeed one of the judgments which was to come upon that generation. If Agabus would have prophesied in plain speech, then those who were the objects of judgment could have prepared for it. It would have been counter productive for Agabus to employ plain speech. Thus he "signified" it so only the elect remant could prepare for it.

But how could God's people understand the prophecy and prepare for it if it was "signified?" The answer is that God provided men who had the gift of interpretation so they could explain the prophecy to the people and they could prepare for it. Note that Luke says that "prophets" came to Antioch with Agabus. Paul told the Corinthians that the "spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets." Therefore, ONLY prophets could interpret the "spirit" of a prophecy. The prophets that came with Agabus must have interpreted the prophecy for the benefit of the specified audiences.

My fellow Preterist here says that Luke plainly said that Agabus's prophecy was about a famine. Yeah! Luke tells us that it was about a famine. That's how WE know it was about a famine. We know because Luke said that Agabus "signified" about a famine.

thinker

[EdwardGoodie]

...The reason Agabus's prophecy about famine was "signified" rather than given in plain speech was to CONCEAL the coming calamity from those who were the objects of God's judgment. The judgment was about to come upon that generation of Israel who had rejected the Messiah. Famine was indeed one of the judgments which was to come upon that generation. If Agabus would have prophesied in plain speech, then those who were the objects of judgment could have prepared for it. It would have been counter productive for Agabus to employ plain speech. Thus he "signified" it so only the elect remant could prepare for it.

For someone who has no desire to argue further, it surprises me that a thread is directed solely for that purpose...

I will address this one thing only.  Thethinker believes Agabus' prophecy was in regard to the coming judgment upon those who rejected the Messiah, as his quote above plainly reveals.

Acts 11:28 - And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.  

However,

1)  Where does it say that Agabus' prophecy was in regard to judgment upon the ones who had rejected the Messiah?  It is an opinion without Scriptural support.  Jesus Himself use the fact that famines were to be a common occurrence long before the judgment (Matthew 24:7).  These famines occur BEFORE the Gospel was to be preached to all the world (Matthew 24:14).

2) Agabus clearly and plainly spoke of a famine forthcoming - unless we are to assume that Luke MISQUOTED Agabus (which is not the case).

3)  And this is the best point of all...if this famine is a judgement directed at those who had rejected the Messiah, why then did the disciples determine to send relief unto the brethren if they were not going to be the recipients of this judgment?  Answer: it makes no sense because this is just a prophecy about famine in general, to no particular group, and for no particular purpose and in accordance with Jesus' own words...

Acts 11:29-30 - Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:  
30 Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.  

If thethinker believes this was a judgment against those who had rejected the Messiah, then he must also understand the time frame of this judgement as being in accordance with the Parousia event.  It is my understanding that the judgment or wrath of God upon those unbelieving Jews would take place at or around AD70.  Perhaps thethinker disagrees with this; I do not know.

Claudius Caesar reigned from AD41 to AD54...

[thethinker]

EdwardGoodie said:

For someone who has no desire to argue further, it surprises me that a thread is directed solely for that purpose...

This thread was created to clarify.

I will address this one thing only.  Thethinker believes Agabus' prophecy was in regard to the coming judgment upon those who rejected the Messiah, as his quote above plainly reveals.

Acts 11:28 - And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.  

However,

1)  Where does it say that Agabus' prophecy was in regard to judgment upon the ones who had rejected the Messiah?  It is an opinion without Scriptural support.  Jesus Himself use the fact that famines were to be a common occurrence long before the judgment (Matthew 24:7).  These famines occur BEFORE the Gospel was to be preached to all the world (Matthew 24:14).

Jesus did NOT infer that famines would be meaningless "common" occurrences. Famines were JUDGMENTS because they were brought about by God. That they happened before the gospel reached all nations is insignificant.

2) Agabus clearly and plainly spoke of a famine forthcoming - unless we are to assume that Luke MISQUOTED Agabus (which is not the case).

Luke says that the famine as "about to happen" when Agabus predicted it. Paul said that the judgment was "about to happen" (24:15, 25). Therefore, the famine and the judgment were "about to happen" together. My point that the famine was a means of judgment stands unrefuted. This is what Preterists believe. EdwardGoodie does not know what other Preterists believe because lives in a coccoon.

3)  And this is the best point of all...if this famine is a judgement directed at those who had rejected the Messiah, why then did the disciples determine to send relief unto the brethren if they were not going to be the recipients of this judgment?

Huh?

If the famine was directed at those who rejected the Messiah, then the disciples would have to discriminate and send relief to the brethren. This is why Agabus "signified" about the famine instead of using plain speech.

If thethinker believes this was a judgment against those who had rejected the Messiah, then he must also understand the time frame of this judgement as being in accordance with the Parousia event.  It is my understanding that the judgment or wrath of God upon those unbelieving Jews would take place at or around AD70.  Perhaps thethinker disagrees with this; I do not know.

Claudius Caesar reigned from AD41 to AD54...

EdwardGoodie erroneoualy sees the Parousia as a punctiliar event. It was not. It was a linear event which covered the whole period of time from Christ's ascension until His actual parousia. This is what Jesus told Caiaphas the high priest. He said to him,

"From this time onward you will see the son of Man sitting at the right hand of power AND coming in the clouds of heaven." Matthew 26:64

Note that the Parousia event was a linear event. Jesus told Caiaphas "from this time onward" Caiaphas would see both Christ's session at the right hand of power AND His coming in the clouds.

Christ's session at the right hand of power and His coming in the clouds ran together in the same point in linear time.

Come out of your coccoon EdwardGoodie and acquaint yourself with standard Preterist teachings! More importantly acquaint yourself with what the scriptures ACTUALLY say.

thinker

[daq]

First off that is not the true statement made to Caiaphas:

Matthew 26:64 TUA (Transliterated Unaccented Greek)
64. Legei auto ho Iesous, @"Su eipas.  Plen legohumin, ap arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epiton nefelon tou ouranou!"^

"Apo arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epi ton nefelon tou ouranou!"

"From this day shall be seen the Son of Man having been seated from the right hand of power and coming upon the clouds of heaven!"

There is NO END or timeframe stated but that: IT SHALL BE SEEN!

More importantly to this topic:
The word "Caesar" does NOT appear in any of the "Greek Morph Texts" of Acts 11:28 and most certainly appears that it may in fact have been a later addition into the "Textus Receptus"-AV-KJV manuscripts.

Acts 11:28 TUA (Transliterated Unaccented Greek)
28. Anastas deheis ex auton onomati Hagabos esemanen dia touPneumatos limon megalen mellein esesthai ef holen tenoikoumenen (hetis egeneto epi Klaudiou).{*}

Acts 11:28 RSV (Revised Standard)
28. And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world; and this took place in the days of Claudius.

Acts 11:28 ASV (American Standard)
28. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great famine over all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius.

Therefore, if this be true, then how can one be so sure that the FAMINE signified through Agabus does not concern the days under Claudius Lysias when also Paul stood before Felix on trial and was then locked away for a season?

Acts 23:18-27 KJV
18. So he took him, and brought him to the chief captain, and said, Paul the prisoner called me unto him, and prayed me to bring this young man unto thee, who hath something to say unto thee.
19. Then the chief captain took him by the hand, and went with him aside privately, and asked him, What is that thou hast to tell me?
20. And he said, The Jews have agreed to desire thee that thou wouldest bring down Paul to morrow into the council, as though they would inquire somewhat of him more perfectly.
21. But do not thou yield unto them: for there lie in wait for him of them more than forty men, which have bound themselves with an oath, that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him: and now are they ready, looking for a promise from thee.
22. So the chief captain then let the young man depart, and charged him, see thou tell no man that thou hast shewed these things to me.
23. And he called unto him two centurions, saying, Make ready two hundred soldiers to go to Caesarea, and horsemen threescore and ten, and spearmen two hundred, at the third hour of the night;
24. And provide them beasts, that they may set Paul on, and bring him safe unto Felix the governor.
25. And he wrote a letter after this manner:
26. Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix sendeth greeting.
27. This man was taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them: then came I with an army, and rescued him, having understood that he was a Roman.

Acts 24:22-27 KJV
22. And when Felix heard these things, having more perfect knowledge of that way, he deferred them, and said, When Lysias the chief captain shall come down, I will know the uttermost of your matter.
23. And he commanded a centurion to keep Paul, and to let him have liberty, and that he should forbid none of his acquaintance to minister or come unto him.
24. And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.
25. And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.
26. He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him: wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him.
27. But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix' room: and Felix, willing to shew the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound.

Agabus the prophet knew this "FAMINE" was still to come: upon PAUL.
Perhaps yours is coming too brothers, (if you are not in it now) ...

Amos 8:9-11 KJV
9. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, (Crucifixion of Christ) and I will darken the earth in the clear day:
10. And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day.
11. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:

[thethinker]

First off that is not the true statement made to Caiaphas:

Matthew 26:64 TUA (Transliterated Unaccented Greek)
64. Legei auto ho Iesous, @"Su eipas.  Plen legohumin, ap arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epiton nefelon tou ouranou!"^

"Apo arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epi ton nefelon tou ouranou!"

"From this day shall be seen the Son of Man having been seated from the right hand of power and coming upon the clouds of heaven!"

There is NO END or timeframe stated but that: IT SHALL BE SEEN!

Daq,

Please go back and read my post and you will see that the grammar you give of the verse supports my contention that Christ's parousia was a linear event. Therefore, all calamities that came upon Israel from the time Jesus ascended to the culmination or full end fell within the scope of His parousia.

thinker

[EdwardGoodie]

Thethinker, this constitutes my LAST interaction with you.  Your manner continues to be most despicable...

So, just because Agabas’ prophecy was “about to come

[daq]

First off that is not the true statement made to Caiaphas:

Matthew 26:64 TUA (Transliterated Unaccented Greek)
64. Legei auto ho Iesous, @"Su eipas.  Plen legohumin, ap arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epiton nefelon tou ouranou!"^

"Apo arti opsesthe ton Huion tou Anthropou kathemenon ek dexion tes dunameos kai erchomenon epi ton nefelon tou ouranou!"

"From this day shall be seen the Son of Man having been seated from the right hand of power and coming upon the clouds of heaven!"

There is NO END or timeframe stated but that: IT SHALL BE SEEN!

Daq,

Please go back and read my post and you will see that the grammar you give of the verse supports my contention that Christ's parousia was a linear event. Therefore, all calamities that came upon Israel from the time Jesus ascended to the culmination or full end fell within the scope of His parousia.

thinker

That is so much the point, thinker, so much the point. I never said that it absolutely may not concern Claudius Caesar of the Roman Empire. So now you have a fork in the road and two roads before you: which one do YOU take in your interpretation?

1) Walking in the Flesh: "Global famine in the time of Claudius Caesar"
2) Walking in the Spirit: "Spiritual famine of Paul under Claudius Lysias"

Verily both are correct for a purposeful reason.
And what if ALL Scripture is written in such a Way?  


Hope you are not leaving entirely EdwardGoodie!  

[thethinker]

daq said:

That is so much the point, thinker, so much the point. I never said that it absolutely may not concern Claudius Caesar of the Roman Empire. So now you have a fork in the road and two roads before you: which one do YOU take in your interpretation?

1) Walking in the Flesh: "Global famine in the time of Claudius Caesar"
2) Walking in the Spirit: "Spiritual famine of Paul under Claudius Lysias"

Verily both are correct for a purposeful reason.
And what if ALL Scripture is written in such a Way?

Luke explicitly said that Agabus "signified" about the famine. This means that he did NOT use plain speech. Why didn't Luke say that Agabus used plain speech. Jesus indicated when He was speaking figuratively and when He would speak plainly.

“These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father. John 16:25

Luke could have said that Agabus spoke "plainly" about the famine but he didn't. He said that Agabus "signified" about the famine. It would have been counter productive for Agabus to speak plainly because the famine was a judgment of God and to speak plainly about it would have given notice to the people who were to be judged.

Furthermore, Luke said that Agabus spoke "in the spirit," that is, the spirit of prophecy. Paul said that the spirits of the prophets were subject to the prophets. So the prophets that were with Agabus must have interpreted the spirit of the prophecy so the people of God could prepare for the coming famine.

Hope you are not leaving entirely EdwardGoodie!

I hope EdwardGoodie is not leavibg entirely. I am allowing him the last word on this thread in the hope that he will return and not pick fights with his fellow Preterists over peripheral matters. EdwardGoodie and I agree on substance and that the Revelation is symbolic. For him to pick a fight with me on how I arrive at it makes no sense. This is a Futurist board and Preterist's "in house" bickering should NOT be brought here because it is counter productive.

EdwardGoodie has a lot of good things to offer as long as he is leaving his fellow Preterists alone. He says many things here of I am convinced are unbiblical but I let them go because it is good strategy.

thinker

[daq]

daq said:

That is so much the point, thinker, so much the point. I never said that it absolutely may not concern Claudius Caesar of the Roman Empire. So now you have a fork in the road and two roads before you: which one do YOU take in your interpretation?

1) Walking in the Flesh: "Global famine in the time of Claudius Caesar"
2) Walking in the Spirit: "Spiritual famine of Paul under Claudius Lysias"

Verily both are correct for a purposeful reason.
And what if ALL Scripture is written in such a Way?

Luke explicitly said that Agabus "signified" about the famine. This means that he did NOT use plain speech. Why didn't Luke say that Agabus used plain speech. Jesus indicated when He was speaking figuratively and when He would speak plainly.

“These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father. John 16:25

Luke could have said that Agabus spoke "plainly" about the famine but he didn't. He said that Agabus "signified" about the famine. It would have been counter productive for Agabus to speak plainly because the famine was a judgment of God and to speak plainly about it would have given notice to the people who were to be judged.

Furthermore, Luke said that Agabus spoke "in the spirit," that is, the spirit of prophecy. Paul said that the spirits of the prophets were subject to the prophets. So the prophets that were with Agabus must have interpreted the spirit of the prophecy so the people of God could prepare for the coming famine.

You may not see it with your current mindset but YOU have all the oikoumene-habitable world with you everywhere you go; YOU are an individual "kingdom" or dominion; YOU as an individual have both the 'adamah-soil of the heart and the 'erets-lands of the outer boundaries and "territories" of the body, (which have "heathen" and "wild creatures" or "sin" in them according to the Scripture and Paul). The Gospel is personal and individual to every believer; each in his or her own appointed times. For the same reason the writings of the New Testament are directed to the first century readers and absolutely applied to them all, and was indeed fulfilled in each of those which overcame in their appointed times: Yet all of it is also unto us; and to every other believer who ever shall be. When you enter into the kingdom you have come to "Jerusalem of Above" and have joined the family of all true believers from the Resurrection of Christ until now, including those raised from the O/T in Matthew 27:52, because the saints cannot die anymore.

Notice something about Paul? His name is still SAUL ~

Acts 11:27-30 ASV
27. Now in these days there came down prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
28. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great famine over all the world: (GSN#3625 oikoumene) which came to pass in the days of Claudius. (Lysias?)
29. And the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judea:
30. which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.

The Gospel of the kingdom must first be preached in all the habitable world, and to every CREATURE in that habitable world under heaven; and then shall the consummation of aionos-age come. However, there first comes a FAMINE in the land and those are like the days of Elias; and Saul had not yet undergone this time of famine in all of his own habitable world. Thus, Agabus SIGNIFIED it to Saul just as the Revelation was SIGNIFIED to John: for the Sevenfold Book of the Revelation of Yeshua is the great Day of the Atonement of John; and the final model for believers following on since the Pentecost of Acts 2.

Matthew 9:14-15 KJV
14. Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?
15. And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.

Matthew 24:14 KJV
14. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world (GSN#3625 oikoumene) for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

The Word was taken from Saul and he endured a famine as we all do.  
And the Gospel went into all of his habitable world and to every creature!  
The true disciple will accept all of the Word and apply all of it to himself.  
Though it be sweet as honey in the mouth yet makes the belly bitter.  

[daq]

Romans 8:17-23 KJV
17. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21. Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

It is all about the body and cutting of the sins which so easily beset us: stiving and struggling against the evil which is present within our own members in a spiritual struggle and war within ourselves to be holy as YHWH is holy; and because we know our body is the Temple of YHWH and the Lamb and no more our own.

All of the ktisis-creatures of your own oikoumene-habitable world are awaiting you: groaning for the adomption wherein they shall be no more abused or neglected. And those "members" which are cut off, mortified, or put to sleep, shall be there in the appointed times, (each of us in his appointed times and none shall be alone in his appointed times). And not all of our members shall sleep but we shall all be changed:

Daniel 7:12 KJV
12. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

Isaiah 11:6-9 KJV
6. The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
7. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
9. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the 'erets-earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.

Re: The Beasts of Man
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2011, 01:44:54 AM »

 

[thethinker]

daq wrote:

You may not see it with your current mindset but YOU have all the oikoumene-habitable world with you everywhere you go; YOU are an individual "kingdom" or dominion; YOU as an individual have both the 'adamah-soil of the heart and the 'erets-lands of the outer boundaries and "territories" of the body, (which have "heathen" and "wild creatures" or "sin" in them according to the Scripture and Paul).

Hi Daq,

The fact is that the word "oikoumene" in Acts 11:28 refers only to the entire land of Judea. Agabus prophesied that there would be a great famine throughout "all the land." The disciples sent relief to Judea only. Therefore, "oikoumene" means "all the land [of Judea].

Furthermore, Luke said that Agabus's prophecy came to pass "in the days of Claudius Caesar." There were four famines during his reign and NONE of them were global. The famines occurred in Rome, then in Greece, then in Rome again and then in Judea.

I'm just giving you the facts bro!

thinker