Control R Book - Surfer Girl. Vowel Teams. Vowel Teams Book - Soap Boat. Compound Words. Compound Words 1 - Block Print. Connecting Words. Inflectional Endings. Inflectional Endings - Block Print. Fun With Naming Nouns. Circle the Opposites 1 - Block Print. Positional Words. Where Words.
Action Words. Contractions 1 - Block Print. Punctuation Marks. Quotation Marks. Quotation Marks - Block Print. Sentence Mechanics. Trace the Sentence - Block Print. No Word Bank. Write About Sports - Block Print. Airplane Trip! Favorite Day. Hide and Seek. Give or Get? The Story of Three Horn. Picture Dictionary.
Class Rules. All About Me. My Bed. Art Gallery. Dorothy Strait. I'm Afraid of the Dark. Little Plays. Lemonade Girl. Mother's Day. Penguin, Penguin. Folk Tales. Chicken Little. Big Star Award. As usual, context is key. The word heaven is used more than one way in Scripture, such as the abode of God , the astronomical realm, and the atmospheric realm.
Why the difference? Therefore, Matthew and Mark are good translations. But does this require that the stars must physically fall to the earth?
First, notice that where the stars fall is not identified in these verses, so it is an assumption that the stars will fall to the earth. But, more to the point, must we understand that this falling is to be taken so literally?
For instance, the English word fall has non-literal meanings. In either case, neither the rise nor the fall are to be taken literally. Such non-literal usages of the Greek word translated fall appear in the New Testament. One example is Revelation , in which addressing the church at Ephesus, the Apostle John wrote,.
Clearly, the word fallen here is not literal. Given this information, how can we know if the description of stars falling in Matthew and Mark are literal or non-literal? It is important to interpret Scripture with Scripture. Matthew is more detailed than Mark , and it includes four elements:. Some of these elements are found in various Old Testament passages. Before deciding whether these Old Testament passages are talking about the same thing, let us explore how many of these elements are present in each passage.
For instance, Isaiah contains elements one and two, but it says something slightly different from element three:. That is, the stars are described as withdrawing their light, much as the light of the sun and moon will also be dimmed. It would be absurd to suggest that the moon will be literally confounded and that the sun will be literally ashamed though the hyper-literal hermeneutic of flat-earthers might demand that.
Some may object that within the context of Isaiah Isaiah —23 , verse 21 reads,. However, given that verse 22 seems to describe the punishment of the host of heaven and the kings of the earth declared in verse 21 and then verse 23 moves on to focus on the glory of the Lord and his reign, the most likely meaning of the passage is that the glory of the sun and moon will be nothing compared to the glory of the Lord.
Joel mentions the first, second, and fourth elements, and as with Isaiah , the stars are said to dim:. Ezekiel —8 includes elements one and two, but as with Isaiah and Joel , element three may be expressed as the stars dimming:. Joel includes the second and third elements, but as with Isaiah , Ezekiel —8, and Joel , the third element may be expressed as a dimming of the stars:. Finally, Joel —31 includes elements one and four, but states something different about the moon:.
What does it mean that the moon will be turned to blood? Contrary to common belief, this does not necessarily mean that the moon will turn red. I have argued elsewhere that this likely refers to the dimming of the moon.
Hence, Joel —31 likely contains the second element as well. Some may object that this understanding of the moon turning to blood in Joel —31 is too far of a stretch. Some might even opine that when Joel referred to blood, he literally meant blood.
Of course, few people would insist on such an extreme literalism. It is important to keep in mind that the prophetic books contain many examples of symbolism, allusions, simile, metaphor, and poetic devices. It would be very boring to say the same thing the same way every time. A hyper-literal approach to these passages would result in the conclusion that each passage is referring to its own unique event or events rather than the same event or events. For example, consider Isaiah and Amos Isaiah says that the sun will be dark at its rising, but Amos says that the sun will go down at noon.
Taken very literally, these cannot be the same events. For one thing, the rising of the sun and noon are roughly six hours apart. More importantly, Isaiah has the darkened sun rising, while Amos says that the sun will unexpectedly set not dim at noon.
For that matter, Ezekiel —8 states that God will cover the sun with a cloud. That is, if Ezekiel —8 is taken literally, the sun neither inexplicably dims nor abruptly sets very early, but merely is covered by a cloud. But that hardly is apocalyptic, because the sun is so blocked on any overcast day.
Nearly everyone would agree that these verses are not to be taken quite so literally, and many believe they refer to the same event. Admittedly, Ezekiel 32 is a prophecy against Egypt, and there is debate about whether it has been fulfilled already or if it awaits a future final judgment.
If it has been fulfilled, Ezekiel —8 is an example of a prophecy that had an immediate fulfillment and will have a later fulfillment as well. Therefore, there is some doubt as to whether Ezekiel —8 ought to be included in this discussion. The one explicit Old Testament passage that mentions the stars falling may be the key passage to consider. Isaiah states the following:. Also notice that the English verb fall occurs three times in Isaiah This verb appears at least 25 times in the Old Testament.
It is normally translated as fade or wither. Perhaps people in the past had no problem understanding that the word fall has many nonliteral meanings. It is important to note the parallel structure found in lines one and three of Isaiah Lines four and five are similes with a dependent clause and prepositional phrase comparing the falling stars to withering leaves on a vine presumably a grape vine and the withering of something on a fig tree.
While the object of the dependent clause in line four leaves is indicated in the Hebrew text, the object of the prepositional phrase in line five is not indicated in the Hebrew text. Since the object of the preposition is absent in the Hebrew, it is probably meant to be implied from the text. But the object is important in English, so the translators provide a likely object. The translators of the English Standard Version quoted above provided leaves as the object of the preposition in line five.
The King James version provides the word fig , but it is in italics to indicate that the word is absent in the Hebrew.
Likewise, the New American Standard Bible inserts the impersonal pronoun one in italics as the object. Since leaves clearly are not figs, all these translations cannot be right. One reads awkwardly in English. Perhaps the Geneva Bible offered the cleverest and most accurate solution to this difficulty, for it inserted the impersonal pronoun it. Does it matter whether the object of the fifth line is leaves or figs? So far, no, but it might matter elsewhere, as we shall soon see.
Given these facts and the context of comparing the leaves on a vine or on a fig tree, wither probably is a much more appropriate translation than fall in Isaiah This collation with other Old Testament apocalyptic passages of astronomical interest strongly argue that Matthew and Mark refer to the stars dimming, not that the stars literally will fall to the earth.
However, Christians hold different views on what the Bible means when it speaks of the stars falling, yet none of the popular understandings require or imply a flat earth in any way. For example, some Christians view these statements as being symbolic. From their perspective, these kinds of passages should not be understood literally, for they represent a symbolic way to describe catastrophic events, such as the sudden collapse of a nation or final judgment.
Others believe that the stars and other heavenly bodies should be viewed in a metaphorical sense. In this view, these heavenly bodies represent angelic powers opposed to God who have been or will be defeated.
The language about their falling or being cast down is understood as God humiliating these principalities and powers by stripping them of the authority and position that he had previously given them. Yet others perceive the passages speak of objects literally falling to the earth but that they are not stars, merely asteroids and or meteors. There is one other New Testament passage that is potentially problematic for this interpretation about collating these different passages.
Revelation —14 reads,. This is the one biblical passage that clearly states that stars will fall to earth. Taken at face value, one might understand this to be a literal falling. However, the comparison to the Old Testament passages discussed above are striking. If so, then the first three of the four elements of Matthew are present here. But one could argue from the full context Revelation —17 that the fourth element is present as well.
But the comparison to Isaiah is even more striking. John appears to be alluding to Isaiah when he likens the vanishing of the sky to the rolling-up of a scroll.
This imagery appears nowhere else in Scripture, suggesting that John had Isaiah in mind when he wrote Revelation How do we resolve this issue?
There are at least two ways to solve this dilemma. Many commentators believe that the falling of the stars in Revelation refers to an exceptional meteor shower.
Flat-earthers are likely to strenuously emphasize that Revelation says that the stars will fall, not meteors. However, they are committing the fallacy of equivocation by holding to this literal interpretation.
The word meteor in the modern sense dates to the Elizabethan era, only four centuries ago. Prior to that, meteors were known as falling stars , a term, along with shooting stars , that is in common use today. Until the invention of the telescope four centuries ago, any point-like luminous objects in the sky, including meteors and planets, were considered stars.
Therefore, it is quite proper to consider that Revelation may refer to an exceptional meteor shower. However, this consideration introduces the problem of collating with the Old Testament passages that tell of the dimming of the stars. Even a huge meteor storm would not affect the stars: they presumably would remain visible.
One could argue that there are two physically separate but possibly synchronized events: a huge meteor storm and supernatural dimming of the stars. While many commentators have no problem with this solution, I find it wanting, because it seems to multiply effects unnecessarily. The other way to resolve this dilemma is to realize that, being prophetic, the Book of Revelation has much imagery and symbolism, so one must be careful in employing hyper-literalism in deducing its meaning.
For instance, the Book of Revelation mentions stars in several places where almost no one thinks that literal stars are intended. Jesus Himself identifies the seven stars as the angels of the seven churches Revelation
0コメント