- Oct 10, 2011
- 24,717
- 5,558
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Celibate
That's just it, they couldn't have understood all of it probably, not with most of them anyway...
God Bless!
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's just it, they couldn't have understood all of it probably, not with most of them anyway...How would a first-century Christian know that when they read this book? Is it perhaps a modern lens we put on it?
It's just logically assumed, etc.Why would that be the case?
So you're suggesting that John sent this letter to these seven churches knowing they wouldn't understand what he wrote? That doesn't really make sense, and does not fit the nature of apocalyptic literature. The book makes references to events that happened during the writing of the book in symbols and metaphors. The book was relevant to them as it spoke of their time.It's just logically assumed, etc.
Everything is in symbols, and signs, I highly doubt they understood all of it, etc.
God Bless!
Believe what you want."The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place."
- Revelation 1:1
"Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea."
- Revelation 1:10
@Neogaia777
He actually was instructed to send it/write it to the "angels of/over the seven churches", and those were the "servants" that were talked about, but, believe what you want...So you're suggesting that John sent this letter to these seven churches knowing they wouldn't understand what he wrote? That doesn't really make sense, and does not fit the nature of apocalyptic literature. The book makes references to events that happened during the writing of the book in symbols and metaphors. The book was relevant to them as it spoke of their time.
Angel means messenger, which likely refers to the elder leadership over the churches...He actually was instructed to send it to the "angels of/over the seven churches", and those were the "servants" that were talked about, but, believe what you want...
God Bless!
Or it could literally mean angels, or an angel over each church, etc...Angel means messenger, which likely refers to the elder leadership over the churches...
Angel means messenger, and can refer to men, not just celestial beings.Or it could literally mean angels, or an angel, etc...
Unless you are going to say those men were angels, etc...?
God Bless!
Bottom line, Revelation is written in such a way that just one person could dedicate their whole entire life trying understand absolutely all of it, and still probably never and totally and fully achieve that goal or aim ever at all ever, etc...Angel means messenger, and can refer to men, not just celestial beings.
Matthew 11:10: "Behold, I send my [aggelos] before your face, who will prepare your way before you."
Luke 7:24: When John’s [aggelos] had gone, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?"
This is why exegesis from the original language is important in expositing Scripture. We rely too heavily on English words in the Western world and its contemporary meanings.
This modern idea that the Church was never meant or able to fully understand this book is a propagated lie, and most people believe it (and I did in my early years in the faith). The book was not written as an enigma, but as an 'uncovering' or 'revealing' of something. If the book does NOT reveal its contents, there is no place for it in the inspired canon, and certainly has no origin from God, who is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). The book plainly reveals the things that were "soon" to take place in the time of those seven churches, and was written to encourage them to endure and to warn them to remain obedient to the truth. This book plainly show there is a pattern and a reference to a host of events that occurred during the latter part of the first-century, including the destruction of the Second Temple (Revelation 11:1-2), in which forty-two months refers to the 3½ years of the Jewish Revolt against Rome before Jerusalem's utter desolation. If we taught more about first-century history, we would realise that much of the apocalyptic confusion stems from an ignorance of this period and the turmoil and famines and wars that occurred during that time. Dispensationalism is largely responsible for this modern propagated lie.Bottom line, Revelation is written in such a way that just one person could dedicate their whole entire life trying understand absolutely all of it, and still probably never and totally and fully achieve that goal ever at all ever, etc...
So do you think every single common churchgoer understood absolutely all of it, etc...?
God Bless!
I'm not saying it wasn't talking about things back then from that time period, etc, but only that "it just wasn't only just about that only", etc, and as with all prophecy, some of it is only meant to be fully understood only in hindsight, or in the rear view, etc, some of it anyway, etc...This modern idea that the Church was never meant or able to fully understand this book is a propagated lie, and most people believe it (and I did in my early years in the faith). The book was not written as an enigma, but as an 'uncovering' or 'revealing' of something. If the book does NOT reveal its contents, there is no place for it in the inspired canon, and certainly has no origin from God, who is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). The book plainly reveals the things that were "soon" to take place in the time of those seven churches, and was written to encourage them to endure and to warn them to remain obedient to the truth. This book plainly show there is a pattern and a reference to a host of events that occurred during the latter part of the first-century, including the destruction of the Second Temple (Revelation 11:1-2), in which forty-two months refers to the 3½ years of the Jewish Revolt against Rome before Jerusalem's utter desolation. If we taught more about first-century history, we would realise that much of the apocalyptic confusion stems from an ignorance of this period and the turmoil and famines and wars that occurred during that time. Dispensationalism is largely responsible for this modern propagated lie.
It refer to events that occurred during the first-century which are patterned in every generation afterward, to which this book is not only an encouragement to the original audience in the original events, but makes full application to the whole Church Age concerning the spiritual battle between Christ and his people with the principles of Satan. I believe the "seven spirits" who are before the throne (Revelation 1:4) represent the seven kinds of churches throughout the Age, whose original heads are represented in the specific ones mentioned therein, so that the warnings given therein to each of the seven churches speak to the seven types that spring in every generation. Rarely has there been a time where the Church in every quarter of the world that only patterned the faithfulness of Smyrna and Philadelphia.I'm not saying it wasn't talking about things back then from that time period, etc, but only that "it just wasn't only just about that only", etc, and as with all prophecy, some of it is only meant to be fully understood only in hindsight, or in the rear view, etc, some of it anyway, etc...
Do you believe revelation tells a story about "from the beginning of time, to the end of time"?, or from at least "after Christ to the end of this time", etc...?
Yes, I do.Don't you think history repeats itself here, etc? And has been repeating itself for a very, very long time here, ever since the fall here, etc...?
Or, they could be those men that carried letters and other forms of communication between churches, to which 'social media' was not available. We read of Paul in some of his pastoral epistles sending brethren with the letters themselves to the churches. This may be the kind of messenger John was referring to in order for this scroll/book to be delivered timely to each church simultaneously.Don't you think that "angels" have some kind of special insight into that last part, etc...?
Of course God's judgment came to fruition that ended the age of Temple Judaism. Now we await for His "last day" when all will be resurrected, some to everlasting life and others to condemnation.So the book of Revelation is completed? Jesus has returned? Babylon has been destroyed? The beast has been thrown into the pit of fire? Satan is bound up? Could it be that Jesus was referring to the generation that was born at the beginning of the end times? Not the generation back then? What sense does the book of Revelation make if it has already been fulfilled? When has the world been cashless? I do not agree that this was something from the past since it is Jesus' Revelation not seperated Revelations of the end times taking place over a non sequential time line.
The temple will be rebuilt not my words but THE WORD. Maybe you educated yourself in the words of man and have lost contact with the Living Word. Let God be True and every man a Liar. Sorry I do not agree with your view.
Outside of Israel becoming a Nation again what other portions do you see as being fulfilled? I am not able to see them. We have not seen the rapture or the wrath of God upon the earth. Nor, has the millennial begun. I guess my question would be if you say that the harlot has been destroyed and other things have all been done it messes up the timeline and flow of the total book of Revelation. It is one Revelation not many Revelations that stand alone on their own.You don't seem to understand the term "partial preterist". Most of revelation has already been fulfilled over the last 1900+ years. We have some things still to unfold yet.
I believe that the Holy Spirit can and will lead to the truth of Revelation. I have held my view for over 20yrs it is not based on anything except what I have found in my own studies. I am sure that a systematized belief and Steve Gregg may have some insight. However, I prefer my Bible as the book and Truth leading me into truth.Of course God's judgment came to fruition that ended the age of Temple Judaism. Now we await for His "last day" when all will be resurrected, some to everlasting life and others to condemnation.
Your view, as I mentioned, is Dispensational Futurism. I came out of that view around 7 years ago, so I have done my research. Also it is not my view, it is the view before John Nelson Darby and Scofield systematized this belief. Consider a time for personal research rather than indoctrination by two men. There is a good book called " Four Views of Revelation " by Steve Gregg. This book will help you unravel the mystery.
Blessings.
Of course God's judgment came to fruition that ended the age of Temple Judaism. Now we await for His "last day" when all will be resurrected, some to everlasting life and others to condemnation.
Your view, as I mentioned, is Dispensational Futurism. I came out of that view around 7 years ago, so I have done my research. Also it is not my view, it is the view before John Nelson Darby and Scofield systematized this belief. Consider a time for personal research rather than indoctrination by two men. There is a good book called " Four Views of Revelation " by Steve Gregg. This book will help you unravel the mystery.
Blessi
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?