Question: Does your church avoid Genesis and Revelation?

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Well, if in your "Literal Approach" you find that right away must spiritualize, elasticize and metaphorize the very first passage:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, 2 who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. 3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near.

I would then submit that your approach is not as literal as you might assume.
I believe a lot of the eschatological problems about the "end times" can in some cases be due to translation problems.
I started translating Revelation back in 2008, but I may need to go back and "refine" it, since I have a lot better online Greek resources to use since then.

Revelation Chapter 1 Verses


"THE TIME IS NIGH AT HAND" AND "COMING IN SWIFTNESS" REVELATION PROPHECY

Strong's Greek: 5034. τάχος (tachos) -- speed
5034.
tachos from the same as 5036;
a brief space (of time), i.e.
(with 1722 prefixed) in haste:--+ quickly, + shortly, + speedily.

Revelation 1:1
An un-covering/revealing of Jesus Christ, which gives to Him, the GOD, to show to the bond-servants of Him, which-things is binding to be becoming In/en <1722> Swiftness/tacei <5034>.

Revelation 22:6

And said to me: "These, the Words Faithful and True.
And Lord, the GOD of the spirits of the holy Prophets, commissions the messenger of Him to show to the bond-servents of Him
which-things is binding to be becoming In/en <1722> Swiftness/tacei <5034>.

Strong's Greek: 1451. ἐγγύς (eggus) -- near (in place or time)
1451. eggus
from a primary verb agcho (to squeeze or throttle; akin to the base of 43);
near (literally or figuratively, of place or time):--from , at hand, near, nigh (at hand, unto), ready.

Revelation 1:3
Blessed/happy the one reading, and the ones hearing, the Words of the Prophecy, and the keepings in it having been Written/gegrammena <1125> (5772),
for the Time is NIGH AT HAND<egguV <1451>.

Revelation 22:10

And he is saying to me "no thou should be sealing the Words of the Prophecy of this Scroll,
For the Time Is NIGH AT HAND<egguV <1451>


.
 
Upvote 0

Samaritan Woman

Active Member
Sep 2, 2013
353
261
Midwest
✟66,456.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Just curious. I've heard of this and wondering if it's generally true. Seem to be noticing a trend.

Possible thought-provoking article:
Should Churches Avoid Genesis and Revelation?

Also, I'm currently preparing for a home study on Revelation. If you know of any good materials let me know. We will focus on the literal approach, but want to hear the other arguments as well.

Are you interested in only books or commentaries as well? I myself have been doing a verse-by-verse study of Revelation with the aid of excellent online commentaries.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Are you interested in only books or commentaries as well? I myself have been doing a verse-by-verse study of Revelation with the aid of excellent online commentaries.

By all means, share. Thank you!
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I believe the problem is not translation but how both Preterists and Futurist who are the opposite sides of the same coin have given life to a temple, worship, sacrifices of an Old Covenant system.

From Pentecost there is only one Temple and the one in Jerusalem whether it be from 33AD to 70AD or some future brick and mortar temple is not the temple, is not the worship, is not sacrifices that are valid to what God requires from Pentecost onwards until Christ returns to judge the living and the dead.

Translation for the Preterists has become pretext for much proof texting and this is how Preterism fails miserably.

Futurists on the other hand create their own problems by interchanging literal and spiritual meanings to create their pretext.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I believe the problem is not translation but how both Preterists and Futurist who are the opposite sides of the same coin have given life to a temple, worship, sacrifices of an Old Covenant system.
Interesting perspective

From Pentecost there is only one Temple and the one in Jerusalem whether it be from 33AD to 70AD or some future brick and mortar temple is not the temple, is not the worship, is not sacrifices that are valid to what God requires from Pentecost onwards until Christ returns to judge the living and the dead.

I'm not sure how that equates to the idea that the Jerusalem temple's destruction did not have to come to pass when it did in 66-70 in order to fulfill prophesy? which is what you appear to be implying.

Translation for the Preterists has become pretext for much proof texting and this is how Preterism fails miserably.

Could you elaborate?

Futurists on the other hand create their own problems by interchanging literal and spiritual meanings to create their pretext.

That makes sense to me.
So on which side do you fall then?
Which error do you subscribe to, the futurist error or the preterist error?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Good links.
I guess we should ask if the OP is open to all views, Preterism, Historicism, Amillenealism, Futurism, etc.........

Fallacies of Preterism

It also appears to be some that are obsessed with the dating of it.
Here are some Revelation commentaries dating as far back as the 1600's
It appears to also contain some futurists views..........

https://www.preteristarchive.com/category/apocalypse-studies/


In dating Revelation to 95 A.D. by using Irenaeus as the primary source, I ask those who are into investigative chronology to name one commentary which cites all three of Irenaeus’ relevant quotes concerning the dating of John’s Revelation to justify its date.
=================

It is to be observed how the result thus reached―a date shortly before the year 70―confirms the explicit statement of the author of Revelation that he wrote in the time of the sixth emperor, before the seventh had come to the throne; that is, the year 68.
======================

The preterist’s attempts to date Revelation before the destruction of Jerusalem fail on both internal and external evidence. This failure is indicative of their whole system, which is forced upon the Scriptures, and in this case, upon history as well. Preterist scholarship on this question is clearly agenda driven.
============================

I have endeavored to demonstrate that advocates of the Jerusalem=harlot view have a strong case to offer…
This view is certainly consistent with John’s stated theme: God’s great divorce of Israel and Christ’s judgment upon her.
===========================

But we have in the New Testament a single book the time of the writing of which can be defined within a few months, which must have been written between June 67 and January or April 68. This book is the so-called Revelation of John.
===========================

If we can accept an early Aramaic manuscript of the Revelation written definitely before AD 70 as original, as the Peshito (later revision of Peshitta) versions claim, we would see that LATER a Greek version needed for the growing membership of gentile churches who did not speak Aramaic.
=========================

most of Revelation, which was given in biblical imagery, is John’s detailed account of the Matthew and Luke’s Mount Olivet Discourse, which describes Jesus’ 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem.
========================

Besides providing an outline for the four sets of sevenfold judgments found in Revelation, some of the other connections between the covenant curses of Leviticus 26 and the book of Revelation are the following:
==================================
This one in particular interest me, as I have thread on it........

Duncan McKenzie: The Last Half of Daniel’s 70th Week (2009)

On the surface there is no gap in Isaiah 61:1-2; looking at Jesus’ teaching, however, He alludes to a gap here. In Luke 4:18-19 Jesus quotes this section of Isaiah up to the last half of vs. 2.

"DAYS OF VENGEANCE" Isaiah 61:2 and Luke 21:22 Revelation

Isaiah 61:2
To proclaim<7121> the year of the good pleasure<7522> of Yahweh,
And the day of vengeance <5359> of our 'Elohim, To comfort all mourners.

Luke 21:22
For these are the days of vengeance<1557>,
to fulfill all things having been written



.
.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I believe the problem is not translation but how both Preterists and Futurist who are the opposite sides of the same coin have given life to a temple, worship, sacrifices of an Old Covenant system.

From Pentecost there is only one Temple and the one in Jerusalem whether it be from 33AD to 70AD or some future brick and mortar temple is not the temple, is not the worship, is not sacrifices that are valid to what God requires from Pentecost onwards until Christ returns to judge the living and the dead......

I'm not following this. Originally there was the Tabernacle, which had the outer court for the sacrifice and the inner rooms. It was the original a place of sacrifice God ordained. Then came the Temple, which was destroyed and then several temples have been rebuilt since.

And even if you are correct, that the worship is not accepted, that's neither hear nor there. Scripture says there will be a Temple that Antichrist will desecrate. That's all that's required. Israel has a long history of apostasy. The book of Revelation (and Daniel, etc.) is not about about Israel coming to faith during the Tribulation, but eventually coming to believe in their Messiah after the Tribulation.
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I'm not following this. Originally there was the Tabernacle, which had the outer court for the sacrifice and the inner rooms. It was the original a place of sacrifice God ordained. Then came the Temple, which was destroyed and then several temples have been rebuilt since.

The original Temple built on Solomon's model was a mechanical system that God did originally ordain to be a dispensation relevant to the context of situation of the Ancient Israelites and in this regard God spoke through both the Old and the New Testament Prophets and Apostles that those who were under the bygone dispensation could never atone for thier sins, could never reconcile themselves to God, could not avert the condemnation that prevented them access to the Tree of Life owing to the Fall and most imprtantly God prevented them from entering his rest Day.

Within the Old Covenant Temple construct the dispensation was insuficient and fell well below the standards of what God required in order to be a restitution to the Garden story and the fulfillment of the prophesy of the serpent's head beong crushed.

This is why from the Garden prophecy, God pointed to the Seed of the Woman Jesus Christ meeting all the conditions of -

Daniel 9:24
“Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

The Most Holy Place being the Holy Spirit Temple from Pentecost that was only possible after the laying of the Cornerstone as the sure foundation of the Temple that God ordained in his dispensation to restore man back to the Garden by restoring the breach through His Messiah.

So the 'Type' Old Testament Temple was only an illustration and never the intended dispensation of God for the purpose of Daniel 9:24 and this is evident that once the 'Anti-Type' Holy Spirit Temple was setup then the illustration is bygone as it had served its purpose that pointed to the 'Anti-Type' New Testament Holy Spirit Temple. So sacrifices that can be offered and accepted by God can only be through the dispensation of the Most Holy Place that is the Living Stones within the Body of Christ, for they are the Temple of God and everything else external has no covenantal agreement with God.

And even if you are correct, that the worship is not accepted, that's neither hear nor there. Scripture says there will be a Temple that Antichrist will desecrate. That's all that's required. Israel has a long history of apostasy. The book of Revelation (and Daniel, etc.) is not about about Israel coming to faith during the Tribulation, but eventually coming to believe in their Messiah after the Tribulation.

The Anti-Christ cannot be a person or persons outside of the New Testment Temple Construct of the Holy Spirit Temple, for these are the many sons of perdition (2 Thessalonains 2), like the Judas Iscariot's, who are of the Temple of the Holy Spirit, but afterwards believed not the truth but served a lie by having pleasure in unrighteousness and in this regard the Fallen Christian is the only subject that once had the knowledge of the truth to have fallen away from the faith and resorted to desecrating the Temple of the Holy Spirit which he/she is/was. Your petext of believing that the book of Revelation (and Daniel, etc.) is about Israel as a nation eventually coming to believe in their Messiah Jesus Christ ater the Tribulation is NOT the context at all.

The Anti-Christ(s) must therefore be Christians who have fallen away from the faith to serve a lie and in this regard they are desecrating their own Temples of their bodies and scripture through several witnesses identified]s them as 'Anti-Christs' or 'Man (Anthropos/Peoples) of Sin' or 'Sons of Perdition'.

1 John 2:18-19
Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

According to John the Antichrists were amongst their own numbers at one stage, where they had originally recieved the knowledge of the truth and yet fell away from the faith by serving a lie and John here identifies those once Christians as Antichrists.

So rebellion can only occur within Christ's very own body of believers who were once in possession of the truth, but then later fell away by serving a lie.

As far as an abomination is concerned before God, the only subject that can offer an abomination instead of the Daily Sacrifice is a person who previously had the unction of teh Holy Spirit then they as the sons of perdition reverted to practices which would desecrate the Temple of the Holy Spirit by bing abominations in place of the Daily. The unbelieving Jews or none believers can NOT bring abominations into the Temple of God, because they do not have access and access requires that a subject have had accepted Christ and then turned against Christ by following practices that would identify them as Antichrists who now offer abominations that offend God.

One exampe of this could be when a Christian Zionist claiming to be for Christ joins hands with unbelievers and then helps in building a Temple external to the Holy Spirit Temple by taking part in an Old Covenant ritual that sacrifices animals and consecrates these practices in their hearts as just and right and this would be grounds for the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation spoken of in Daniel, where the perpitrators are not Jews but rather fallen away from the faith Christians who replace the Daily with an Abominable practice that only results in death to those who tread the Son of of God under foot and who offend the Spirit of Grace.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The original Temple...

...was the Tabernacle. Read the book of Hebrews.

and God ordained the rebuilding of the Temple many times.

This is an undeniable point.

Within the Old Covenant Temple construct the dispensation was insuficient and fell well below the standards of what God required in order to be a restitution to the Garden story and the fulfillment of the prophesy of the serpent's head beong crushed.

This is why from the Garden prophecy, God pointed to the Seed of the Woman Jesus Christ meeting all the conditions of -

Daniel 9:24
“Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

The Most Holy Place being the Holy Spirit Temple from Pentecost that was only possible after the laying of the Cornerstone as the sure foundation of the Temple that God ordained in his dispensation to restore man back to the Garden by restoring the breach through His Messiah.

You've completely missed the point. I answered this. It's totally irrelevant. I would agree the Temple sacrificial system is obsolete. I would argue that sacrifices Israel makes in the Tribulation are obsolete and won't gain them anything. Irrelevant. We're talking about whether or not there is a temple, not the efficaciousness of that temple in that day.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
We're talking about whether or not there is a temple, not the efficaciousness of that temple in that day.

A physical brick and mortar temple cannot be desecrated as far aa God is concerned because the sacrificial system of the Daily is absent and you agree with it being obsolete. One cannot desolate a physical temple if something is being brought into it that would remove the Daily, since the Daily sacrifice is not present in a physical brick and mortar temple.

This is what Daniel 8:11-14 said -

It magnified itself, even to the Prince of the host; it removed His daily sacrifice and overthrew the place of His sanctuary.

The Daily Sacrifice is tied to the Sanctuary. The Prince of the host/subjects is Jesus Christ the High Priest who intercedes in the Holy of Holies.

A Temple could only be a legitimate Temple if it offere sacrifices that God requires and this can only be done through the Holy Spirit Temple of God.

And on account of rebellion, the host and the daily sacrifice were given over to the horn, and it flung truth to the ground and prospered in whatever it did.

The rebellion is by those very hosts within the Temple Construct of the Holy Spirit who fall away from the faith and power was given them to prosper in their rebellion for a set time.

Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, “How long until the fulfillment of the vision of the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, and the surrender of the sanctuary and of the host to be trampled?

Notice there is a set time where rebellion by the sons of perdition desecrate the Temple of the Holy Spirit and do two things -

They surrender or forfeit the Holy Spirit Sanctuary and at the same time, the remaining hosts who serve in the Sanctuary are also trodden under foot in the process, because of the rebellious apostasy that is happening by the power the many sons of perdition have committed by their treasonous act against the Prince of the hosts (body of Christ) Jesus Christ.

He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be properly restored.”

So, the Sanctuary and the hosts/subjects (Body of Christ) have never been destroyed or discontinued offering their sacrifices but there appears a time frame where the Daily is temporarily removed and something else replaces it that desecrates the sanctuary and treads under foot the hosts, until the sanctuary is restored and purged of the host that committed the desecration within the Body of Christ.

This prophecy has nothing to do with unbelieving Jews or a physical sanctuary they build. The fact remains that a Sanctuary must be in operation before the desecration happens and then after the set time the sanctuary and the hosts that serve within the sanctuary are restored. This could only be the Holy Spirit Sanctuary.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Just curious. I've heard of this and wondering if it's generally true. Seem to be noticing a trend.

Possible thought-provoking article:
Should Churches Avoid Genesis and Revelation?

Also, I'm currently preparing for a home study on Revelation. If you know of any good materials let me know. We will focus on the literal approach, but want to hear the other arguments as well.

The best studies on prophecy that can be found are a series penned in the 1860s by an Irishman by the name of William Kelly. He wrote a commentary on almost every book of the Bible, including all the books normally considered prophecy. And, as he based his comments entirely on the Bible itself, he described current events with greater accuracy that any writer from the twentieth century.

You can read all of his works free onliine at STEM Publishing
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Calminian
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Revelation is the only book of the New Testament my Church doesn't read during the service.
Most of Revelation and much of the NT is comprised of OT Hebrew symbology and language, which Hebrew Jews would be familiar with, so I would say to read it as a Hebrew Jew would read it.

https://israelstudycenter.com/
Studies in Jewish Context and Culture will revolutionize your Bible study and help you to make significant progress in your life-long process of becoming both innovative and responsible interpreter of the Sacred Scriptures..............................

Allusions in Revelation from Old Testament
THE SYMBOLISM IN BOOK OF REVELATION

For example, the word "halleuyah" is mentioned only 4 times in 1 chapter of the entire NT, and that upon the destruction of the OC City of 1st century Jerusalem/Temple [IMHO].

https://israelstudycenter.com/hebrew-hallelujah/
“Hallelu” (הללו) and “Yah” (יה).

Revelation 19:
1 And after these I hear as sound great of a vast throng in the heaven saying "halleluyah! the salvation............
3 And a second-time they have declared "halleluyah!
and the smoke of Her is ascending into the ages of the ages".
4 And fall the elders, the twenty four, and the four living-ones,
and worship to the God, to the One sitting upon the throne saying:
"amen! halleluyah!".
6 and I hear as sound of a throng, many, and as a sound of waters, many, and as sound of thunders, strong saying:
"halleluyah! that reigns Lord the God *of-us, the Almighty.
Revelation 21:7
he who is overcoming shall inherit all things,
and I will be to him -- a God, and he shall be to me -- the son,

The word "Almighty" is used in only 1 verse outside of Revelation in the NT, that by Paul...a "Hebrew of Hebrews" [Philippians 3:5]:

2 Corinthians 6:18
'And I shall be to ye as a Father, and ye shall be to Me as sons and daughters
is saying Lord Almighty/pantokratwr <3841>.'


.......................


.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Revelation is the only book of the New Testament my Church doesn't read during the service.
Yet it is the only book in the entire Bible that includes an explicitly stated blessing on all who read it and heed it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BABerean2

Newbie
Site Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yet it is the only book in the entire Bible that includes an explicitly stated blessing on all who read it and heed it.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The last few verses contain a curse.

.


.
 
Upvote 0