How can we be confident in our theories about the Book of Revelation?

Barraco · Jul 21, 2015

gradyll said:
among those of conservative theological seminaries, and among ones who believe in verbal plenary inspiration. Revelation itself is not that widely disputed. It has a few outlines of how to interpret it, and it is not uncommon in the circles I have been in, to have such outlines memorized word for word. There are many expositors who have delved into revelation, there really is not excuse in the day of information, not to hold literal views of the Bible.

if people don't believe in literally, they are living in deception.

they are living with the girlfriend, but won't commit to marriage.

to them God and others are just play things to be toyed around with when they are lonely and bored, but not enough importance to commit to communication or understanding of what that person is saying or needing.

If we cannot love those who we see, how can we love God who we do not see.

When we believe in an unliteral Bible, we are believing the enemy and going down without a fight.

if there are contradictions, which many of us assume there are, then instead of changing the bars regarding inspiration and verbal plenary views, lets tackle these questions one at a time together.

my favorite book when doing home bible studies, and classes at local churches, was Norman Geisler's book on When Critics Ask. That book was sufficient to reveal that many simply don't want to understand the literal Bible, because if it were true then other versus, such as versus regarding Christ's lordship:

!!!ONLY THOSE THAT REPENT OF EVERY SINGLE LUST OF THE EYES, AND LUST OF HE THAT DOES THE WILL OF GOD WILL HAVE ETERNAL LIFE:

“Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father in not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.”-1 John 2:15-17

“If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.”-1 John 2:29

“And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.” -1 John 2:25

“These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and they ye may believe in the name of the Son of God.” -1 John 5:13

!!!WHOEVER SINS HAS NOT SEEN GOD, HE THAT DOETH GOOD WORKS IS SAVED:

“Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” -1 John 2:6-7

18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. -1 John 5:18

!!!WHOEVER IS BORN AGAIN DOES NOT SIN, HE THAT DOESN’T DO GOOD WORKS IS A CHILD OF DEVIL:

7Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is born[1] of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. -1 John 3:7-10

[1]a is born: or, has been born

Whoa. I only meant the book of Revelation. People can't be that unified in interpretation of the book when you have things like:

1. Preterism
2. Futurism
3. Historicism
4. Literal interpretation only
5. Figurative interpretation only
6. Pre-trib
7. Post-trib
8. Pre-mil
9. Amil
10. Post-mil

That's not all the different interpretations, but sums up my point that we are not mostly unified in interpretation of the book (of Revelation).

7xlightray · Jul 21, 2015

I'll give ya some things to look into. It fits in with the whole theme of the prophecies against the church, though hard to accept, but we were warned Matthew 13:33; Luke 13:21; and the falling away come first, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie 2 Thessalonians 2:3,11, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22, to only mention a few.

Revelation 1:1 (KJV) ...to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;

Revelation 1:3 (KJV) Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Revelation 22:10 (KJV) ...Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

Revelation 22:16 (KJV) I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in [G1909 – epi – on, upon, against, in] the churches.

The scriptures do not tell us to use some Hebrew, Greek, or Roman formula.

Not only that, but the man is in scripture, in the Old Testament. God gave us everything we need for the wisdom of understanding this...

Revelation 13:18 (KJV) Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number [G706 – arithmos -total, amount (reckoned up), or group] of the beast [read it carefully, and count them carefully]: for [G1063 – gar (look how this word is used in scripture)] it is the number of a man; and his [a man's number, he is telling us how we are to count them, and it is related somehow to this man] number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Notice it does not say count the name of the beast, it just says count the number of the beast. Notice it first was a single fiery red dragon, then transforms into this beast. And it is this beast that overcomes the saints.

The understanding of the formula is with this man, and the man is Solomon. And the reason it is Solomon is for more then just one reason, but for now read Solomon's number: Six hundred threescore and six, for the formula 1 kings 10:14; 2 Chronicles 9:13.

Another clue, the number of the beast is not Six hundred threescore and six, it only gives us understanding of who this man is, which is Solomon, and the formula.

Another clue is Hosea 13, notice the pronouns.

Also notice what it says, the NAME, or the NUMBER of his NAME.

There is an obvious reason why I can't say, but whoever receives the understanding will understand why. It is a test from God, and it will be very, very, very hard to accept, because God shall send them strong delusion!

Lavendar Frog · Jul 21, 2015

Ripheus27 said:
I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

You might find researching The Cumaean Sibyl oracles helpful.

Jaxxi · Jul 29, 2015

He who has ears let him hear...has anyone considered where it says "the abomination of desolation" that is to be interpreted as " the Obama nation of desolation"?? Maybe they didnt understand it properly then having no reference...

Jaxxi · Jul 30, 2015

Awaken4Christ said:
Sometimes A prophecy isn't discerned properly until the appointed time or times.

That makes complete sense.

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

ananda said:
Isn't the book of Revelation one of the weakest supported books in the Bible?

Depends on what you mean. It is not only in the future, but in the past as well. The war in heaven between Michael and his angels and Satan and his angels happened long ago and it is the reason God had to place his own begotten sons (and daughters) on earth in flesh bodies, to decide between Satan or God. A great deal of Revelation is highly symbolic and because of that many people are frightened of things to come. Our Father will allow only so much. Satan will come in peacefully and prosperously as instead of Christ, deceiving the entire world. How would one be deceived by a raging monstrosity? Satan will appear in his natural state, being a celestial being and created full pattern, he will dazzle everyone for none of us have seen an archangel before. God spared nothing in the creation of Satan and because of his beauty, he was easily able to seduce Eve. Many people are on the lookout for a rapture, but none will occur, we will all go through the tribulation of anti-Christ. That is another thread...................

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

Jaxxi said:
He who has ears let him hear...has anyone considered where it says "the abomination of desolation" that is to be interpreted as " the Obama nation of desolation"?? Maybe they didnt understand it properly then having no reference...

Actually , that phrase is The abomination of the desolator, which changes it from a condition, to an entity. However, I do agree that Obama is an abomination, a stranger and a Mamzir.

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

Jaxxi said:
That makes complete sense.

Yes, I am in agreement, but there is so much knowledge of what is to come by the major prophets that we over look it, thinking that these things were long past, but as Paul states:"These things happen as an example of things that will befall you in the end times".

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

A New World said:
While I disagree that Revelation was a vision from beginning to end, I obviously agree that there are unavoidably going to be interpretations and theories. Personal experience and documented history prove that. However, I still think it's possible to find the truth in the midst of chaos.

John was told, "Write therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are [about] to take place after this" (1:19). Since that referred to the past, present and imminent future he wasn't recording only what he was shown in visions.

I believe John was writing to specific audiences concerning events and circumstances that were relevant to them. Since they were intimately familiar with John's Old Testament sources, I believe they had no problem understanding his intended message. If it's true (and I believe it's demonstrable) that the book is about the fall of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant age which came in AD 70, I believe it could, and can, be approached as though it was a literal statement of fact.

The specific audiences are us, for we have not yet gone through the times in the future sense that he wrote of. Christ said that no stone would lie atop another. The wailing wall still exists to this day, but it is made of stones laid atop of other stones. It has never fallen, therefore was never having to be rebuilt. In the day Christ was referring to, it too shall be cast done to rubble. When He says not one stone, He means not one stone. Period.

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

2ducklow said:
A big reason that people fail to understand the book of revelation is because they are confused about who Jesus is. another big reason is because most Christians don't realize that the bride of Christ isn't all Christians. Those two factors cause people not to have a clear picture of what Revelation is about.

The bride is the many membered body of Christ. Christ said that he knew His sheep and they hear His voice and follow Him, but not all are His sheep. The woman is on seven mountains, (continents) and she is a harlot (Israel). Why? Because she did not wait for the true husband to return, instead she chose the instead of Christ, instead of waiting for the true Christ, which is why Christ Himself will say "I never knew you" They ran out of oil in their lamps (truth) and went off with the false husband, who is Satan pretending to be Christ.

ob77 · Jul 31, 2015

Notrash said:
Nice point and post. Most interpretations are indeed theories. As a full preterist, I find theorems gleaned from the letter. One major hint of its past subject matter and personal, subjective understanding is that in rev 15:3, the saints of the day sang the song of moses and the sing if the lamb. The song of Moses is Deut 32 and applied to the end of the mosaic covt and its nation and geneological purposes at the time of the coming if shiloh (Gen 49:1-10; the new prophet if deut 18:15-19 (Acts 3:22-24) Messiah, Immanuel etc.

To me, though I don't know every first century appllication or interpretation, the revelation being a first century applicatiin (with a few applications to 132-135 AD) has become a theorem.

Thus the time frame is first century and the subject matter best understoid by those who were come out of judaism, or of the tribes of Israel but who had thourough knowledge of the prophets.

Judaisim did not come from Adam, nor Christ. Judaism comes from Rabbinism ,which came from Talmudism, which came from the Pharisees. Read John chapter 8 as to what Christ said about the Pharisees Then read the Pharisees, a two volume book by Louis Finkelstein, published in 1947, where the author traces the origins of Judaism from its origin to present day Judaism. There is no such thing as Judeo-Christian anything. This will be eye-opening for some, others it's just another day, which is why they are asleep.

Der Alte · Jul 31, 2015

ob77 said:
Judaisim did not come from Adam, nor Christ. Judaism comes from Rabbinism ,which came from Talmudism, which came from the Pharisees. Read John chapter 8 as to what Christ said about the Pharisees Then read the Pharisees, a two volume book by Louis Finkelstein, published in 1947, where the author traces the origins of Judaism from its origin to present day Judaism. There is no such thing as Judeo-Christian anything. This will be eye-opening for some, others it's just another day, which is why they are asleep.

Well it must be true someone I never heard of wrote a book about it way back in 1947.

Jaxxi · Jul 31, 2015

ob77 said:
Actually , that phrase is The abomination of the desolator, which changes it from a condition, to an entity. However, I do agree that Obama is an abomination, a stranger and a Mamzir.

I have found more knowledge in the Book of Enoch which was written before Moses time. You can google Book of Enoch pdf. And download and read it. I think its very Biblical and gives more info.

ken777 · Aug 1, 2015

Ripheus27 said:
I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

I believe the Bible is the Word of God Word, and in that sense it is supernatural. Therefore it can accomplish more than we realize. If we look at the letters of Rev chapters 2 & 3, I believe we can see this.

There is an application to the 7 churches extant at that time, there is a spiritual application which relates to churches throughout the Christian age, and there is an historical application that previews the history of the Christian church. All three are equally valid, and equally true, imho.

.

Barraco · Aug 2, 2015

Jaxxi said:
I have found more knowledge in the Book of Enoch which was written before Moses time. You can google Book of Enoch pdf. And download and read it. I think its very Biblical and gives more info.

It's also extremely racist and elitest.

Jaxxi · Aug 2, 2015

Barraco said:
It's also extremely racist and elitest.

Racist? Towards who? So is Gone with the Wind and The Bible itself but hey those were the times man. It wasnt racist back then. Thats just the way things were. Dont hate the player...

James Is Back · Aug 2, 2015

Jaxxi said:
I have found more knowledge in the Book of Enoch which was written before Moses time. You can google Book of Enoch pdf. And download and read it. I think its very Biblical and gives more info.

If it's Biblical why didn't the Catholics,EO's and Protestants add it to their canon? The only group that did is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

createdtoworship · Aug 2, 2015

ob77 said:
Judaisim did not come from Adam, nor Christ. Judaism comes from Rabbinism ,which came from Talmudism, which came from the Pharisees. Read John chapter 8 as to what Christ said about the Pharisees Then read the Pharisees, a two volume book by Louis Finkelstein, published in 1947, where the author traces the origins of Judaism from its origin to present day Judaism. There is no such thing as Judeo-Christian anything. This will be eye-opening for some, others it's just another day, which is why they are asleep.

"The name "Jews" (Yehudim) first appears in the last books of the Bible such as Esther, Daniel and Ezra, books that deal with the Babylonian exile. This is because it was mainly the tribe of Judah that was exiled to Babylon and people called them Judeans or Jews. The name "Jews" gradually came to be used for all Jews, whether from Judah, Benjamin, Levi or any of the small number of members of other tribes who were mixed in with them."

above quote from the site below:

http://www.truetorahjews.org/qanda/hebrews

ob77 · Aug 2, 2015

gradyll said:
"The name "Jews" (Yehudim) first appears in the last books of the Bible such as Esther, Daniel and Ezra, books that deal with the Babylonian exile. This is because it was mainly the tribe of Judah that was exiled to Babylon and people called them Judeans or Jews. The name "Jews" gradually came to be used for all Jews, whether from Judah, Benjamin, Levi or any of the small number of members of other tribes who were mixed in with them."

above quote from the site below:

http://www.truetorahjews.org/qanda/hebrews

That simply is not so, for Judah and Israel were broken as the stick which bore both of their names was broken. The reason was Judah took in the Kenites as scribes to keep the word of God intact. You will read that in 2nd Chronicles verse 55. The families of the Kenites attached themselves to Judah, and then later associated themselves to that tribe, even though they were not originally part of it. The word Kenite means descendants or sons of Cain. These people usurped the title of God's children and eventually forced all the rightful children of God out of the picture. Christ Himself, declares this in John Chapter 8. Paul claims to be a member of the tribe of Benjamin, but not as a Jew. Benjamin was one of the thirteen tribes of Israel.
If one can find the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, you will find an entry of the Kenites, who they were and what they did.
I have, personally but one not need to take my word for it.
We should always test our teachers. For further reading, go to John chapter 8 to see what Christ Himself had to say about these people.

ob77 · Aug 2, 2015

ob77 said:
That simply is not so, for Judah and Israel were broken as the stick which bore both of their names was broken. The reason was Judah took in the Kenites as scribes to keep the word of God intact. You will read that in 2nd Chronicles verse 55. The families of the Kenites attached themselves to Judah, and then later associated themselves to that tribe, even though they were not originally part of it. The word Kenite means descendants or sons of Cain. These people usurped the title of God's children and eventually forced all the rightful children of God out of the picture. Christ Himself, declares this in John Chapter 8. Paul claims to be a member of the tribe of Benjamin, but not as a Jew. Benjamin was one of the thirteen tribes of Israel.
If one can find the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, you will find an entry of the Kenites, who they were and what they did.
I have, personally but one not need to take my word for it.
We should always test our teachers. For further reading, go to John chapter 8 to see what Christ Himself had to say about these people.

I would also suggest that the student check out Revelation 2-9 and 3-9.

How can we be confident in our theories about the Book of Revelation?

Senior Member

Newbie

Life Is Easy When You're Purple

Half-ready for Anything.....

Half-ready for Anything.....

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Half-ready for Anything.....

"to live is Christ, and to die is gain"

Senior Member

Half-ready for Anything.....

CF's Official Locksmith

In the grip of grace

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads