This case is a fascinating one, as I am sure you all know now.  Opinion on the questions I posted varied in the comments:

1. What would you assume the “booth” or “tabernacle” of David is, referred to in v. 11?

* some saw a structure here; others saw David’s dynasty or household.

2. What would it mean to you that this “booth” or “tabernacle” is “fallen” and in need of repair?
3. What would you presume would be meant by the “rebuilding” of this “booth” or “tabernacle”?

* along with the above, it could point to a literal rebuilding or repair of a structure, or restoration of a dynastic line.

4. Who do you suppose would be “the remnant of Edom”?
* some saw Edom; others saw in Edom a broad reference to Gentiles.

This passage is quoted in Acts 15 at the Jerusalem council. The passage is very clearly applied to the formation of the church through David’s dynastic heir, Jesus. The church was the new manifestation of the people of God, which included Gentiles (it was “circumcision neutral”).

Now here is the rub. WHICH responses are “literal”? Did Luke cite the passage “literally”?  I put it this way since many think that literal citation and literal fulfillment is the only way Bible prophecy works, and that *exact* citation in line with “original intent” is required lest inerrancy be lost.

What say ye?

Here is what Beale and Carson’s book has to say about this passage.