Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth (formerly inerrancy?))

From: <>
Date: Tue Jan 06 2004 - 18:43:38 EST

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Roberts" <>
To: <>; "Robert Schneider" <>;
"Don Winterstein" <>; "Gary Collins"
<>; <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth
(formerly inerrancy?))

> I note that the scholars you cite are of the Dispensationalist school,
> except of course Foxe (I would like to know what he actually said). I do
> have much respect for Dispensationalism with it n dispensations and
> virtually ignoring chunks of the bible for us in this "dispensation". They
> have gone overboard on taking prophecy literally and adopting a gross
> typological approach as George Murphy highlighted recently. The result is
> that though they aimed to defend scripture they have reduced it to
> absurdity. (Typology in the bible is important provided it is not
> overblown.)
> If you want to read more see "The Intellectual Disaster of Fundamentalism"
> in Mark Noll's wonderful book "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind" and
> all of the book.
> Incidentally you cite Coffman and Unger on the word of the Lord in
> but in the OT prophets The Word of The Lord is NOT synonymous with the
> bible.
> It is interesting to note that a modified dispensationalist approach is
> developing now which is more in line with scripture. However the Left
> series still sells well and does the Gospel no favours.
> Michael

Wow! An intelligent response. Thanks Michael, it is greatly appreciated.

First of all, I am not a dispensationalist. Not that it matters, since not
everything a dispensationalist says is wrong. To assert such is known as the
Genetic Fallacy.

I could write a dissertation on the question you asked, but I need not,
since I have a witness from the eight century who is clearly NOT a
dispensationalist. I refer to the Venerable Bede's Explanatio Apocalypsis
(written about 710 AD). Here's what he has to say about the Two Olive Trees
in Revelation (which are clearly correspond to those in Zechariah):

olive trees. The Church is irradiated by the light of the TWO TESTAMENTS,
and ever waits upon the commands of the Lord. So also the prophet Zechariah
saw one candlestick with seven branches, and these two OLIVE-TREES, that is,
TESTAMENTS, pouring oil into the candlestick. This is the Church with its
oil, which never fails, which makes it shine for the light of the world.

Note the profound and perfect integration with my Kerygma. Here's an online

Of course, it is a big mistake to appeal to authority as a proof of an
interpretation of Scripture. I felt it necessary to cite others because you
were ignoring the evidence. The only question that really matters is if I
succeeded in making my case. Curiously, no one has yet to address the
evidence I give.

Concerning the Word of the Lord as refering to the Bible - of course it does
not *always* refer to the Bible, but that certainly does not mean that it
*never* so applies. To assert such is to impose a HUGE limitation on the
interpretation of Scripture. Concerning its use in Zechariah 4, Coffman
specifically asserted that it did indeed mean the whole Bible. I quote: "Nor
should the meaning of it be restricted to that immediate portion of the word
of the Lord addressed to Zerubbabel. (See a full discussion of this
candlestick as the word of God in my commentary on Hebrews, pp. 181-183.) "

Here's the source:

Good chatting Michael,

In service of the Everlasting Word,
Richard Amiel McGough
Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at

PS - I don't like the Left Behind series at all. Neither it, nor
Dispensationalism, have anything to do with my understanding of Scripture.
Received on Tue Jan 6 18:42:46 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 06 2004 - 18:42:46 EST