Scripture is God's Law-Word of which "prophecy" is only a part. Chilton had this to say regarding this question in Days of Vengeance:

"If the Book of Revelation is primarily a prophecy to the first-century believers, is it of any value to Christians today? As a matter of fact, that question faces us with regard to every book in the Bible, not just Revelation; for all Scripture was writt en "to" someone else, and not "to" us. But St. Paul stated a fundamental principle of Biblical interpretation: "

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16-17). God's judgment on (1st century) Israel for her disobedience can happen to us as well, if we do not persevere in faith and works. If Israel could be broken off (once before) from the covenantal Tree of Life, so can we: "They were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be con ceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you. Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity; but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again." (Rom. 11:20-23) "The Book of Revelation therefore has continuing lessons for the Church of all ages." (pg. 581)

What is the purpose of prophecy? Prophecy is only the warning of future judgment. The Prophets were God's prosecuting attorneys and the prophecy was God's Covenant Lawsuit against a sinful and rebellious people. The whole message of God's Word to us has a lways been "repent or perish."

Prophecy does not rule our lives, or at least it shouldn't. It has no other purpose except for warning. All past "fulfilled" prophecy still serves as a warning to future generations. It is history that we should learn from so we don't repeat the sins of o ur forefathers.

What rules our life (or should, anyway) is God's Law, not prophecy. If we obeyed God there would be no need for "prophecy." Prophecy is intimately linked to God's Law because it is a legislation of it for good or bad. God has a law, and when His people do n't obey it He is a merciful God and gives us fair warning of our coming judgment with the option to repent. This is always how He has dealt with His people. Deut. 28 is a prophecy. It is a legislation of the consequences (judgments or blessings) for obey ing or disobeying God's Law.

Has Deut. 28 been "fulfilled" as if it is only applicable to a one-time event? Of course not. It is "fulfilled" either negatively or positively according to how we live. What would we be left with if all prophecy is "fulfilled," if that is possible? Only God's moral Divine Law-Word to guide our lives, perhaps? Would that be so "terrible?"

We could also say, "Is God's Covenant (from Old to New) "all" we have now? This question implies that the loss of "prophecy" should be some sort of negative. It should be seen as a blessing! But we are not freed from the consequences of willfully disobeyi ng God's Covenants so take God's prophecies to ancient Israel to heart! He no longer treats us as children, but as friends. Out of love we seek to obey His commandments. He expects us to mature and be responsible for our own lives.

We live under His grace, that we might push on to maturity, live responsibly and in love without Him ruling over us' like a tyrant. This is the freedom Christ has won for us. Free will. As He said, many are called, but few are chosen. Who do you suppose a re chosen? Those who freely choose to love God, and thus keep His commandments.

Christ has re-established things as they were at the first. God is now once again the High King of Israel as it was before the Israelites desired a king like all the other nations in I Sam. 8. In the process he has empowered us as "sovereigns" or free-men in our standing among other men. God is Sovereign, or the Sovereign of sovereigns. We are "kings" but God is the King of kings. We are supposed to live up to that designation and live our lives like adults instead of children who need to be told what to do with "prophecies" and threats of future judgment.

We are supposed to read His Word and seek His will out of LOVE for Him. "If you love Me, obey My Commandments." As Paul stated in I Cor. 13:8- "LOVE NEVER FAILS; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues they will ce ase; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away." Question, did the perfect come? Yes He did. Paul was speaking rhetorically about Jesus the Christ. He was perfect and kept the Law perfectly. In this sense He is our savior from judgment, IF we love Him and keep His commandments.

Christ is our "prophecy" today. "When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things." Childish things? prophecy, tongues and knowledge perhaps? So what has replaced the se childish things?

"For NOW we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known. But NOW abide FAITH, HOPE, LOVE, these three; but the greatest of these is love."

We have been freed of childish things, we are now expected to STAND and be men. Remember Paul's words, "Stand, be strong and act like men!" What is our duty and what did Christ do for us? "It was for freedom that Christ set us free: therefore keep standin g firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery." Gal 5:1

The following is the basic foundation of Bible interpretation. It is an excerpt from the book "The Cure for Millennial Madness" by Michael Hall.

INDEXING: The Hermeneutic Question

When you open the Bible, you find a book that is not so easy to understand. It is full of weird names, images, ideas, and referents. Suddenly you are thrown back into a different time, age, world, language, culture, and customs. To understand the language , ideas, and referents of the Bible, you have to index its linguistics to find the referents. This means asking the hermeneutic questions in order to first discover what the author meant.

Thus in seeking to understand and accurately interpret the literature of the New Testament Scriptures we need to index the features of the data.

• What happened (the content of the data)
• When spoken (time of writing)
• When information would occur (time of occurrence)
• Where (the socio-political, religious place or environment)
• Who (the recipients of the message)
• How (the method or process of the events)
• Why (the reasons, motivations, meanings)
• In What Way (the style of communicating the events)
• etc.

Only by such indexing, will we be enabled to contextualize the material. To fail to do this lends not only to misunderstanding of its communication, but misusing and actual distortion. A "text out of context" is almost always a pretext for ideas and opini ons imposed upon it. This explains why (and how) you can prove almost anything with the Bible. If the text is not indexed and contextualized, if you do not put coordinates on the time, place, author, literature, etc., the words of the text can easi ly become distorted and made to sound like whatever message you desire.

This is not only true for the Bible; it is true for all literature. Quote someone out of context and you have the potentiality for gross distortion of the message. When did that person say it? A quote from his 8 year old self will be quite different from 30 or 50 year old self. What was the context of the statement? To whom? Etc.

Now when you consider that the Bible text was written in languages now long dead, in a culture and world that no longer exists, by people and to people that we sometimes have little information about, that dealt with referents now buried in ancient histor y, how much more true is this?

When you open the Bible, you are immediately ushered into a world that is very different from your everyday world. Opening the biblical text immerses into a story that occurred in a far away time and place, characterized by strange customs, language, thou ght patterns, history, referents, etc. Opening these pages sets you down in a different world, time, and culture. It time-travels you far before the modern industrial age to a time when the world was still barbaric. Suddenly, you are in the Roman Empire, in one of its small provinces, in a nation that hated being under Roman occupation and that was impatiently waiting for their Messiah to deliver them from their present world and usher in the long-awaited "kingdom of God" that would fulfill the covenant p romises to Abraham.

All this challenges the person wanting to interpret and understand the Bible. The Bible, you undoubtedly already know, is not one book, but a multiple book comprised of many books and therefore many literary genre (different kinds of literature). Nor did these writings arise at the same time. They were written at different times and places in response to particular needs. Accordingly, to understand any given piece of biblical literature Q you need to know WHO wrote it, WHEN it was written, to WHOM, about WHAT, for WHAT purpose or objective, etc.

Unless you take the time to do this careful kind of indexing of the referents, the words will mislead you to erroneous conclusions. Without doing this literary work, your thinking and perceiving will be sloppy, lazy, and inaccurate.

To do this kind of literary exploration is to enter the domain of EXEGESIS. This discipline studies how to interpret and understand an author's meanings, intentions, words, style, etc. which are in the text given his background, linguistic style, etc. If you don't do exegesis, you will end up doing what many do - INGESIS (EISGESIS). This means reading your own preconceived ideas INTO the text! This is not a wise idea if your objective is to know what the Bible says.

This explains the importance of the domain of study called HERMENEUTICS. This "science of biblical interpretation" arises from the need to understand the literature as a communication piece utilizing various literary devices for conveying and packaging me aning.

Hermeneutics is necessary for understanding literature. When you read any literature, from the newspaper to the comics, to a textbook on auto repair, you engage in a hermeneutical task. Accordingly, you ASSUME numerous hermeneutic principals about the lit erature. These principals serve as the INTELLECTUAL KEYS that open a text to understanding based on your presuppositions about language (linguistics), meaning (semantics), and communication (information processing, coding, and outputting).

Hermeneutic Presuppositions

Reading any literature demands that you engage in a hermeneutic task and that you make numerous assumptions about words, language, context, etc. These conscious or unconscious presuppositions serve as your operational hermeneutic principles by which you " make sense" of the words and meanings offered you. IF these are the determining elements which explain how you will interpret a text, understanding and elevating your linguistic presuppositions become important in and of itself.

As a science and art, hermeneutics enables us to properly handle metaphor phrases (i.e. "he was tickled pink") without literalizing. It enables us to deal with structural devices like paragraphs in nonfiction, poetic lines in poetry, linguistic markers in narrative stories, literature genres, Hebraicism, etc.

Old World Literary Devices

Scrolls from the ancient world did not contain a "Table of Contents" as do modern books. Those authors never began their writing with any kind of prelude about what the reader would find in the book. Instead, they would use a storytelling device. Accordin gly, many of their manuscripts would being with A STORY which would essentially "outline" the book in terms of the themes to come. This would serve to prepare the reader for coming thematic ideas. Consider, as an example, Luke's opening story about Elizab eth which reflected the "Hannah" story of 1 Samuel. Within the story are many preludes of Luke's major themes.

This illustrates just one of the differences between ancient and modern literary devices. Biblical literature gloried in ORAL STORYTELLING TECHNIQUES. Loaded throughout the texts are a great many oral literary devices which the authors would program into their writing in terms of word plays, plays on word sounds, repetitive phrases, etc. This illustrates also the importance of knowing the original languages.

The Socio-Political Context As Part of Context

Hermeneutics preeminently concern CONTEXT. This includes both the literary context of the material and the socio-historical context. Imagine interpreting this statement: "King David's Watergate with Bathsheba was his downfall." All the linguistic and etym ological work in the world on the word "Watergate" would not explain its significance. Without the history behind the Nixon years as President, "Watergate" would remain a hidden phrase. In fact, to break down the word and figure out how "water" and "gate" fits into the meaning COMPLETELY MISLEADS! In such a case, the sociological analysis behind the word is essential to good hermeneutics. "Watergate" alludes to AN EVENT. Statements in literature that allude to events are ALLUSIONAL. This is valuable, in p art, for the way it helps us to understand how words work. Linguistically, words serve merely as vehicles for conveying meaning. Meaning (or semantics) does not reside in the word, but in the mind of the one attributing the meaning of significance. What a "word" means therefore always depends on what the speaker or framer of that word intended it to mean. To discover that meaning, you have to discover the speaker, his or her world, the references to which they refer, etc. You have to index.

If meaning resided in the word itself, you could use some "authoritative" dictionary and settle the matter. But NO DICTIONARY is "authoritative." Every dictionary merely relates the ways the word is used, has been used, the multiple meanings that it can h ave given different contexts, and how it came to carry such meanings.

Now allusional words and referents are everywhere in the New Testament (NT). From Jesus' parables and apocalyptic statements, to Romans, Hebrews and Revelation, allusional literature predominates. In these writings, you will find God's call to Abraham (Ge n. 12), the Egyptian exodus, the Sinai ordinance of the Pentateuch by the hand of angels, the kingdom of David and Solomon, the Babylonian captivity, the restoration of Israel to their land, the Macabbean revolt, etc. Allusions to these events provided an ecdotal prototypes.

The events of AD 33 were allusional events. To describe it, the biblical writers used such terms or phrases as, "the Cross," "Calvary," "Golgotha," and "Christ's death." These terms usually signified far more than their etymologies reveal. References to C hrist's cross, death, or blood stood as one WORD SYMBOLS for both the events and their meanings. Theologians today speak about that entire context as "the Christ Event." Much theological significance is subsumed by speaking about Good Friday, The Resurrec tion, sitting at the right hand of the majesty on high, etc.

Likewise, the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 was another such date. The events of that year are loaded with significance in terms of biblical covenant history: Nero's persecution, the Roman-Judean War, the Fall of Jerusalem, the separation of "Judaism" (Phari seeism) and Christianity, the end of the apostolic age, etc. All of these significantly impact understanding the New Testament. In fact, without understanding the historical milieu behind AD 70 in that first-century world, you are guaranteed to misunderst and both many scriptures and many theological ideas.

A clear understanding of the first century begins with the realization that Judea was an enemy-occupied colony of Rome. By the sixth decade, the Zealot Movement in Palestine had become a formidable and explosive force. In AD 66, the seven-year Judean-Rome War began with a fury that Josephus could only designate as a "madness."

The first century Milieu enables us to understand a little more about the politico-socio-grammatical- and religio- issues which were prevalent then. This hermeneutic context then enables us to understand many of the biblical statements. HISTORICAL MILIEU plays an important role in the hermeneutic question. (In "a milieu" is French for an environment or setting.) So a HISTORICAL MILIEU = Historical Setting.

CONCLUSION?

The literary milieu (setting) of the Bible reveals that this book is comprised of many different kinds of literature and writings. No wonder understanding depends on the indexing process (knowing who wrote it, when, to whom, and why). Texts then are alway s conditioned by their contexts. Rip a text apart from context and you create a pretext! If you make indiscriminate applications of the biblical text without taking into consideration the various levels of its context, you will more than likely be imposin g your Western thought-patterns, beliefs, and presuppositions on the text.

All of this is CRUCIAL regarding eschatology. Here is a domain where many use the biblical text with little precise and LOTS of sloppy linguistics. They jump into exposition without indexing the text at all. They do a "cut and paste" kindergarten kind of theology that merely ties words from different texts together without checking context, etc. Such, in turn, creates a millennial madness that undermines the sound mind that God gives.

Here are my concluding thoughts about where I'd like to see Christians heading today.
From: Rick Savage

Does this trend of violence today have to escalate or do we have the means to position ourselves to offer a more effective hope and plan for bringing about change in our world today? Someone once said that violence is the last resort of the frustrated man who feels impotent to effect change in any other way. Are we really impotent and powerless today that we cannot effect change in any other manner?

Specifically, I had in mind more than just an analysis of Biblical case law but rather developing a more comprehensive vision and plan for concerted Christian efforts at Reformation toward Dominion in the civil and judicial arena so such extreme measures would not be seen as our only "hope."

The "patriot" movement seems to see the "Constitution" as our only "hope" and has offered the militia movement as a solution and means to enforce it - by force and violence. The "Jewish" Zealots of the 1st century reacted in the same way against the Roman One World Order. Look what happened to them! Paul said our weapons are not carnal but spiritual and Divinely powerful for the destruction of governing orders. We've given up these weapons too soon by putting our faith back into the carnal weapons of the flesh. God will fight for us and He will deliver us if we only do it HIS way. Of course hand in hand with this lack of hope is the false hope of the "last days madness" hysteria. The end of the world mentality has a lot to do with bringing about this sort of irrational extremist behavior. After all "the sky is falling" and what else can we do?

"Identity" lacks a comprehensive world and life view. It has no systematic theology that is relevant to today because it is not grounded in the true reality of God's Sovereignty and of the progressive nature of His Biblical Covenants. Identity does not ha ve any workable biblical plan that can be applied to ALL of life to reform it from top to bottom.

One major thing that is unique about the "Identity" movement is it's emphasis on who the "Israelites" are and are not. This is ALL that makes "Identity" different. Not that identifying true Israel today and in history is unimportant, but rather it is not the MOST important issue. It is only ONE key to understanding the Bible correctly. In Hermeneutics - the science of Biblical interpretation - there are many keys to correctly interpret the Bible. And the question of WHO is only ONE of these keys. Identity majors in the "who."

In like manner many of the Preterists only focus on the WHEN. This is why Charles Weisman wrote the book "The Kingdom of God" because he recognized the Preterists lack of interest in the question of WHAT is the Kingdom.

The Christian Reconstructionists have focused on the HOW of the Kingdom. They know you can't replace something with nothing. They have worked on the practical application of God's Law to society. One effort was called the Biblical Blueprints series (10 vo lumes). But even they don't have all the pie because they have the WHO distorted. (Spiritual Israel only rather than converted (redeemed) physical Israel - Heb. 8:8-10).

The moral of this story is, "Identity" isn't the whole taco and it has been ineffective in effecting any significant change in society because it has spent too much time focusing on only one area of Biblical interpretation and sometimes scorn practical ap plication. Why? Because it is a lot of work to address the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHY, etc. and nobody has prepared them to undertake a more practical and comprehensive view and application of the Gospel to all of life today.

The "Identity" movement needs a new identity. It needs to understand that there is much more to figure out than the "WHO" of the bible. One thing we need is to see the significance of the time references or the WHEN of Scriptural events. This deals with e schatology or the study of the "end times." The WHEN of Scripture has a lot to do with HOPE because it makes the Sovereignty of God throughout ALL of history a confirmed FACT!

I Cor. 13 tells us that Love overcomes all and faith, hope and love NOW reign. If we had these three things we would be overcoming all. These are the spiritually mature things of the Ways of God. On the heels of this we need to know the WHAT of the Kingdo m. This has to do with reforming our ideas on God's nature and how His Kingdom interacts and manifests in the world. Following that we need the HOW of the Kingdom. This tells us how to be effective in propagating the Kingdom in the world to bring about ch ange or "fruit." This is what I called for in the article "A Call for Christian Action."

Let's stimulate one another to love, a pure heart and good works and keep this primary in our discussions to come.