I hear ya. I really do. I think Revelation doesn't just encourage Christians to hold fast during persecution, but also warns Christians to not hold loosely to the promise that Jesus is coming back. I think that is the point your missing and getting hung up on. As I said, only 2 of the 7 churches were persecuted, Ephesus and Smyrna. The message to Sardis was, "Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you." To the church of Laodicea the message says, "I counsel you to buy from me....white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen..." The sixth plague even gets interrupted with a message, "(Behold! I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!)"
The Romans didn't invent the catapult during the war with Judea. That happened all throughout the Dark Ages too. However, the hail was not intended for Jerusalem (unless you believe Babylon is Jerusalem). But if you're going to be a full preterist, you might as well say that the seventh plague was hail falling on the city of Rome. That means, in the first century, Rome was to receive the catapults, not Jerusalem. In that aspect, your interpretation is wrong. Rome wasn't destroyed until 410 CE and its emperor was not overthrown until 476 CE. Full preterism just doesn't fit correctly Eclipse.
Let's set the record straight. When I hear futurist, I think about someone who believes in a seven year covenant by some antichrist who will enter a third temple and break that covenant halfway through, starting a tribulation on earth (in which the true believers are raptured). I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THAT. Therefore, I do not consider myself a futurist. That is the futurist doctrine. You might be talking about something else and should therefore modify your wording so that there isn't any confusion.
I believe that every generation in history has experiences the sovereignty of Christ as he was making the nations of the world God's footstool. Therefore, I am closer to an historicist than a futurist. A futurist believes that nothing in Revelation will happen until an event in the future that starts with a treaty made by the antichrist and the events culminate over seven years.
I get that chapters 12-14 present a history of persecution. I'm not denying that. But you still haven't told me what the ten horns are.
Yes, the flood that comes out of the dragon's mouth is the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation. And if the Christians had not heeded Jesus' advice to get out of Judea when they see revolts happening in the temple and the city surrounded by soldiers, they would have been destroyed along with the Jews in Jerusalem. However, the Christians heeded the message when they saw Cestius surround the city and then flee from Judea, and they fled, many hiding in Petra (the earth swallowed the flood). That was circa 66-70 CE. However, it goes beyond. Then, when Church escaped Judea, then dragon turned to make war against her offspring, which we know was the Roman Empire calling for systematic persecution of the Gentile churches from 2nd to 4th centuries. Then Christianity was given a time a peace (and the dragon stood on the shore of the sea) and persecution was at bay for a time. And then a beast came out of that sea and that beast was the revived Roman Empire, also called the Holy Roman Empire.
If you ignore everything else from Rev. 12:10, then your point may stand. But I keep following the text without mandating that the text fits a doctrine of interpretation.
But it doesn't end there, does it? If you stick strictly to preterist doctrine, you have to force the interpretation into senseless stretches and fabrications of interpretation that don't even fit historically together without being overwhelmed by opposing evidence. The ten horns would have to be TEN powers, not just powers in general. The value ten isn't put there just to have a number there. That is why I can't fit strict preterism into my methodology. Who were the ten horns during John's time? Nero, the four emperors including Vespasian, Titus, Vespasian, Domitian, Nerva, and Trajan? Then what were the seven heads? What was the great mouth? How does it fit with the fourth beast of Daniel 7, of which is much referred to?
I get that your saying that the beast is a false version of Christ and his kingdom. I just don't agree with your interpretation. You're basically applying the number symbolism to get rid of the worry of numbers.
So, basically you are saying that every generation has experienced all the events of Revelation 4-18? Babylon was not destroyed only once, but over 18 times?
I didn't say that what John was writing about was to happen lifetimes away. Since you assume me to be a futurist, you blind yourself from seeing what I'm trying to say. What I was saying is that the events John wrote about started in his time and continues on until Revelation 19 is fulfilled and then they continue on until a new heaven and new earth are created.
It's not an incorrect premise. 2 Thessalonians 2:8 reveals that the lawless one will be destroyed by Christ's glorious return. Revelation 19:20 shows that Jesus overthrows the Roman Empire as well as its antichrist at his glorious coming. The Roman Empire fell in 476 CE. Now, unless it was resurrected, then technically, Jesus would have returned in 476 CE. That didn't happen. You'd have to ignore preterism and postpone this prophecy by your own admission in order to make sense of this event. My belief is that Jesus has been exercising his power over the last 2,000 years and provided us signs to keep watch for his return. He could come any day. I agree!
The fact that most of the world's Christians are poor might be the emphasis why Laodicea is so disgusting to Jesus. They don't care! They have all they need! And while Laodicea has all it needs, and while the bankers and few elite have all they need (and more), millions are starving and suffering from poverty. That is the point. At what other point in Church history was the Church ever part of a democracy? The word Laodicea means, "The people (laity) rule." That is what democracy means as well. On top of that, why did John only choose THOSE SEVEN CHURCHES. They had names, histories, and circumstances that were prophetic and gospel-centric to John's generation as well as the generations afterward.
Upvote
0
