I read and appreciated the article. It came across to me as coming from a "Partial Preterist" viewpoint, which viewpoint I currently lean heavily toward. I find it interesting that the author and her husband are part of a Calvary Chapel in Carlsbad CA., being that CCs as a whole are very much opposed to that viewpoint and are "officially" Dispensational. Maybe she's sort of a "closet Partial Preterist" there, who knows. Anyway, I thought I'd share the 2nd point and talk about it a bit. The author writes:
"We tend to read the book of Revelation as if it’s written to Christians of 21st Century America so we can know what our future holds. Yet, the Revelation of Jesus Christ was a letter written “to the seven churches that are in Asia” (Revelation 1:4) to provide for them comfort in the midst of the persecution they were enduring and to strengthen them, as well as give them hope for what was soon to come."
"So, every time you see the word “you” in a narrative, you must realize that “you” is not literally you. This letter written from prison to persecuted Christians in the First Century and delivered through the Roman Postal System used veiled language, at times (Revelation 13:18), that its direct recipients would fully understand. So, be a history buff. Brush up on what was happening in the First Century and why these words would be a comfort to them and why certain codes would be significant to them and quit trying to put yourself into the picture. There is room for application of God’s Word after you have first looked at what the text says by its original author to its original audience. The basic model of hermeneutics is to first ask What does the text say? Secondly, ask What does it mean, in light of who it was written to and the time at which it was written? The third and final question to ask is What does this mean to me and how I should live? Application is important, but keep first things first. Remember to whom it was written and read it through the eyes of a First Century persecuted Christian."
The clear need for applying this principle comes to mind when considering certain portions of other NT books as well.
For example, in Romans 16:16 Paul wrote to the Roman Christians, "Greet one another with a holy kiss."
Does that mean we should take that command and literally apply it today no matter what? I think we'd all agree that we must consider the historical and cultural setting of that time. But in terms of application for us, we can deduce that we should be loving and hospitable toward one another when we gather together, and for us today that can manifest via a hug or hand shake.
And in Colossians 4:1 Paul exhorts, "Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven."
Does that mean we can or should encourage the owning of slaves in our context today? Of course not. But those who have employees under them can apply the principle of treating their employees rightly and fairly.
It's the same when it comes to much of the book of Revelation. Much of it is DIRECTLY applicable to the first century churches, but we can still learn from and apply the principles deduced therein.
Yes, the literal, physical Second Coming of Christ is clearly taught in Revelation, especially in certain clear places such as chapter 20 where we read of the Great White Throne of Judgment and of the casting of multitudes into the lake of fire. But again, much of that awesome Bible book is DIRECTLY applicable to those first century Christians and "secondarily" applicable to us and our time.
Btw, Steve Gregg has an excellent free verse by verse series on Revelation. You can easily google his site and find it there or on his YouTube channel.