Revelation 11:15-19--IJ?

[tall73]

Ok, I've never said Ezekiel 43:10 was pre-advent judgment. Rev 11:1,2 are.

You have said that measuring = judgment, and then applied that here. But I am noting something that you didn't account for.

I am stating that there is a literary allusion to Ezekiel. Until you deal with that then you cannot make sense of the passage. Therefore you must show what the allusion means, and explain why you think measuring means judgment when in Ezekiel it did not. And that is the allusion apparently being made here to the measuring of the temple with a rod.

Therefore if the measuring in Ezekiel was not an investigative judgment--and it was not--then that

A. Calls into question your assertion that measurement = judgment.

B. Raises the question of just what was intended by the allusion in the first place.

I think you are forgetting the writer is not writing at the present time. In another word, the future events were shown to John in visions, does that prove they are still future to us? Do you now hold futurist view on prophecies?

I never said anything about future to us.

The issue is the ORDER of events.

The one action COMES BEFORE the other. The measuring comes before the 42 months. The witnesses, who witness for 42 months come after the measuring.

The "will" indicating future just shows what is future to the action of measuring which is seen in the current time. The problem is you say the 42 months are BEFORE this when the narrative has the measuring and then the 42 months.

Therefore wherever you place them on the scale they will be out of sync with this being the Adventist IJ .The measuring comes before the 42 months. And there is no way to have the 42 months as Adventists reckon them come AFTER the IJ. It just doesn't work.

Now what is the likely timing here? John was asked to measure the temple in his time. Therefore the measuring is in his time, as part of his symbolic vision, apparently to illustrate something.

Then the future reference of the 42 months is mentioned which will happen later.


So there is no warrant for describing an order of 42 months and THEN the measuring. The measuring is done by John. The 42 months are future from that point.

 

[tall73]

Now the bigger issue is you say that this passage is speaking of the Adventist IJ.

But you haven't shown that. You have assumed it and expected me to agree. It is your case to make. And in order to make it you have to lay out the whole meaning of the text.

Here is what has not been shown in your argument:

A. You are assuming that measuring always represents judging. Please show that.

B. You are assuming that if it is an investigative judgment that it is the Adventist one in 1844, though the text never says that. There is no info indicating 1844. And additionally you have already alluded to such non-linear time elements as references to the second coming in chapter 1. So if the narrative jumps around, how do you anchor this to 1844? How do you anchor anything? But the closest chronological data is the 42 months. Therefore if anything you have to reckon it in relation to that. And the 42 months seem to come after the measuring. The 42 months do NOT include 1844 or any period during which the IJ would run according to Adventist thought. So how does this support your point? You have not shown what the 42 months are or the relation of them to the passage.

C. You have not explained the reference to Ezekiel or why he made it.

D. You have not explained what "nations" means here.

F. You have not explained what the trampling done by the gentiles is

G. You have not shown the meaning of the court given over to them for trampling.

H. You have not show the relation of the measuring narrative to the witness narrative, etc.

In other words you have not even said what the passage means yet or spelled out your homework done to reach your conclusion . You have just said it is talking about the IJ because there is measuring and the people of God are involved.

Until you explain what the whole text means and why it was written as it was then you have made no case at all. You have just made a claim.

 

[digdeep]

Now the bigger issue is you say that this passage is speaking of the Adventist IJ.

But you haven't shown that. You have assumed it and expected me to agree. It is your case to make. And in order to make it you have to lay out the whole meaning of the text.

Here is what has not been shown in your argument:

A. You are assuming that measuring always represents judging. Please show that.

B. You are assuming that if it is an investigative judgment that it is the Adventist one in 1844, though the text never says that. There is no info indicating 1844. And additionally you have already alluded to such non-linear time elements as references to the second coming in chapter 1. So if the narrative jumps around, how do you anchor this to 1844? How do you anchor anything? But the closest chronological data is the 42 months. Therefore if anything you have to reckon it in relation to that. And the 42 months seem to come after the measuring. The 42 months do NOT include 1844 or any period during which the IJ would run according to Adventist thought. So how does this support your point? You have not shown what the 42 months are or the relation of them to the passage.

C. You have not explained the reference to Ezekiel or why he made it.

D. You have not explained what "nations" means here.

F. You have not explained what the trampling done by the gentiles is

G. You have not shown the meaning of the court given over to them for trampling.

H. You have not show the relation of the measuring narrative to the witness narrative, etc.

In other words you have not even said what the passage means yet or spelled out your homework done to reach your conclusion . You have just said it is talking about the IJ because there is measuring and the people of God are involved.

Until you explain what the whole text means and why it was written as it was then you have made no case at all. You have just made a claim.

OntheDL I have to agree with Tall you have not made a good case, scriptually, to show that Rev 11 is talking about the IJ. I am here to discuss, debate, and learn so I look forward to your response.

DD

 

[StormyOne]

there is no case that can be made for the IJ concept.... it flies in the face of everything that is just and righteous.....

The IJ belief suggests that we serve a, punitive, vacillating God...

 

[Jimlarmore]

Clearly, we know from the narrative that Rev 11:18 tells of "The time for the judgement of the dead". Also, I think it's pretty clear from the language that this judgement is not an executive but a pre-advent one.

If we take the context of this clear back to Rev 10 where it tells us in verse 6 that prophectic time had elapsed and that the little book that made John's belly bitter would be unsealed then we can make some assumptions that it could be referring to the 1844 event.

The problem of course is the 2300 days is given only one time in one place in the Bible. It would certainly have been nice if it had been placed here in this set of texts in Revelation in some way. The 1260 days is given 7 times in the books of Daniel and Revelations so I don't understand why the 2300 days is only given once. Especially if it was to have as important an impact as we give the IJ.

So let's examine some of the assumptions we as adventists make and see if they really hold water or not.

1. The prophecy in Dan 8:14 of the 2300 days concludes in 1844 ushering in "the time of the end."

I've spent a lot of time researching this and to me the 2300 days concludes in the year 1843-44. Whole volumes could be written about this but if you accept the day for a year idea then this is pretty solid. Since there is no other prophecy that is longer or goes " time wise" beyond this I think it's safe to assume that we have been living in the end times since 1844.

2. The 1844 event initiated the heavenly version of the day of atonement celebrated by Israel for years.

I'm not certain this one is very valid/solid yet. The Bible does not give us a clear picture of this event in heaven or a repeated time line conclusion to set our prophetic clocks by. Heb 9:26 lends support to the idea that Christ would present His blood in the "end of the ages" which if you look at the word "end" in the greek it certainly applies to the time of the very end. However, the Bible stops there and you can't build an entire doctrine on one text. Nearly all of the context of this verse implies that Christ's blood was offered at or near His ascension making the heavenly DOA happen back then. The 2300 days is never mentioned again in the Bible.

Based on patterns we see that God follows before He makes a big move I think it's safe to assume He will indeed have an "investigative judgement" before He comes back. This may be going on now or may be in the near future. Will this investigative judgement involve the dead. I think so as it clearly referrs to this in Rev 11. Will it be the heavenly version of the DOA. I can't embrace that from all I have studied in the Bible yet. The search continues.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[tall73]

Clearly, we know from the narrative that Rev 11:18 tells of "The time for the judgement of the dead". Also, I think it's pretty clear from the language that this judgement is not an executive but a pre-advent one.

If we take the context of this clear back to Rev 10 where it tells us in verse 6 that prophectic time had elapsed and that the little book that made John's belly bitter would be unsealed then we can make some assumptions that it could be referring to the 1844 event.

A. You still have not explained why the wicked are being dealt with in that judgment or why there are rewards/punishments given. The investigative judgment is INVESTIGATIVE.

B. Why would we make the assumption that the little book experience relates to the Adventists? We haven't even looked at its scriptural background yet. Once again here we have a literary allusion to the prophets. Any attempt to identify this book scene must take that into account.


We can start with these before going into the 2300 days which is not linked directly to this context.

 

[Jimlarmore]

A. You still have not explained why the wicked are being dealt with in that judgment or why there are rewards/punishments given. The investigative judgment is INVESTIGATIVE.

The act of judgement clearly allows for such when it's performed. There can be only two outcomes to God's judgement and that is reward or punishment. When one is saved the other is automatically condemned. Separating the wheat from the tares, goats from the sheep etc. ? Just because the wicked are mentioned here does not mean that they are included or are on an equal footing in this judgement per se'.

Another thing to consider is this: Those who would be considered as "Chistian" span a huge gambit of folks many of which would be considered by us as apostate. Will they be a part of this judgement? Good question?

B. Why would we make the assumption that the little book experience relates to the Adventists? We haven't even looked at its scriptural background yet. Once again here we have a literary allusion to the prophets. Any attempt to identify this book scene must take that into account.

Not only the prophets but ancient customs involving coronations of kings as well.

BTW, what do you think is the scriptural background for the little book? I've been looking at this for a while I would like to see what you have.

God Bless
Jim Larmore


We can start with these before going into the 2300 days which is not linked directly to this context.[/quote]

 

[Jon0388g]

Now the bigger issue is you say that this passage is speaking of the Adventist IJ.

But you haven't shown that. You have assumed it and expected me to agree. It is your case to make. And in order to make it you have to lay out the whole meaning of the text.

Here is what has not been shown in your argument:

A. You are assuming that measuring always represents judging. Please show that.

B. You are assuming that if it is an investigative judgment that it is the Adventist one in 1844, though the text never says that. There is no info indicating 1844. And additionally you have already alluded to such non-linear time elements as references to the second coming in chapter 1. So if the narrative jumps around, how do you anchor this to 1844? How do you anchor anything? But the closest chronological data is the 42 months. Therefore if anything you have to reckon it in relation to that. And the 42 months seem to come after the measuring. The 42 months do NOT include 1844 or any period during which the IJ would run according to Adventist thought. So how does this support your point? You have not shown what the 42 months are or the relation of them to the passage.

C. You have not explained the reference to Ezekiel or why he made it.

D. You have not explained what "nations" means here.

F. You have not explained what the trampling done by the gentiles is

G. You have not shown the meaning of the court given over to them for trampling.

H. You have not show the relation of the measuring narrative to the witness narrative, etc.

In other words you have not even said what the passage means yet or spelled out your homework done to reach your conclusion . You have just said it is talking about the IJ because there is measuring and the people of God are involved.

Until you explain what the whole text means and why it was written as it was then you have made no case at all. You have just made a claim.

I agree there is a problem with the timing of the 42 months if we take the text as it stands.

But there is an alternative interpretation, although by no means rock solid.

In the KJV, the text reads:

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months." Revelation 11:2


The translators have inserted a ';' after 'not', and a ":" after Gentiles. This may be significant.


I am no expert on greek grammar, but from Young's Concordance we can see the tenses of these words. Tall is correct in saying that the holy city "shall" they tread is future tense - and if we read this as coming after the measuring, then this is a problem for traditional Adventist thought.


But, I think it is interesting to note that "it is given" would be a much more decisive way of determing whether the 42 months is indeed after the measuring. If the text stated "it will be given to the nations, who will tread..." would be more convincing that the 42 months is after measurment.


The tense of the word 'didomi' - to give - is aorist: "the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time." This is significant, because the angel could just be re-iterating the fact that the nations will tread underfoot for 42 months. The angel would be telling John to measure the temple, leave out the court: (which is given to the nations, and they will tread it underfoot for 42 months) - emphasising a predetermined fact.


On the issue of measurment, Christ said:

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matthew 7:2


It is interesting that the three things instructed by the angel for John to measure - the temple, the altar, and them that worship therein, are the same three things said to have been cleansed or atoned for in Leviticus 16: the holy place, the altar, and the people.




Jon

 

[tall73]

I agree there is a problem with the timing of the 42 months if we take the text as it stands.

But there is an alternative interpretation, although by no means rock solid.

In the KJV, the text reads:

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months." Revelation 11:2


The translators have inserted a ';' after 'not', and a ":" after Gentiles. This may be significant.


I am no expert on greek grammar, but from Young's Concordance we can see the tenses of these words. Tall is correct in saying that the holy city "shall" they tread is future tense - and if we read this as coming after the measuring, then this is a problem for traditional Adventist thought.


But, I think it is interesting to note that "it is given" would be a much more decisive way of determing whether the 42 months is indeed after the measuring. If the text stated "it will be given to the nations, who will tread..." would be more convincing that the 42 months is after measurment.


The tense of the word 'didomi' - to give - is aorist: "the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time." This is significant, because the angel could just be re-iterating the fact that the nations will tread underfoot for 42 months. The angel would be telling John to measure the temple, leave out the court: (which is given to the nations, and they will tread it underfoot for 42 months) - emphasising a predetermined fact.


On the issue of measurment, Christ said:

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matthew 7:2


It is interesting that the three things instructed by the angel for John to measure - the temple, the altar, and them that worship therein, are the same three things said to have been cleansed or atoned for in Leviticus 16: the holy place, the altar, and the people.




Jon

John,

I will look at the tense info later. Please analyze the OT allusions.

Also note that it is John measuring in his own time.

Whatever the relation of the trampling and 42 months the timing of the measuring is fixed.

And since I already noted that measuring SOMETIMES means judgment the text from Jesus does not help. The most immediate reference is to Ezekiel. So show how that context is denoting judgment.

The issue is whether measure ALWAYS means judge. But the more important question is whether it does in the text alluded to.

As to the holy place, the altar and the people--do you remember an altar being judged in the Adventist IJ? Was the altar judged or was it cleansed?

Do you remember the altar being judged in the type? Was it measured or was it cleansed?

Part of the problem of course is that Adventists change the type from blood to books.

 

[tall73]

Now back to the tenses.

John is told to measure. That is in his time.

The court was given over--aorist. So the court was already determined for the gentiles before the measuring.

They will trample the holy city for 42 months. The holy city is in the accusative, the direct object.

They (referring back to gentiles) will trample--future-- for 42 months.



So to sum up, the measuring is in John's time. The court was already determined to be for the gentiles (past time) so John should NOT measure it (present time).

The gentiles WILL trample (future time) for 42 months.

The measuring comes before the trampling.




In chronological order we would have

court determined for gentiles-----------------John is to measure the temple, but NOT the court-------------------nations will trample the court for 42 months.

Now yes, the aorist can have non-temporal uses. But none of those would change the placement here of the 42 months in the future.

And apart from the chronological data we also have the fact that John is doing the measuring, which we never say of the IJ. We also have the measuring of the altar, which was never part of the type.

We have yet to account for the allusion to Ezekiel.

 

[Jimlarmore]

The little book in the hand of the angel in Rev 10 get's part of it's Old Testament allusion in Ezek 2&3. Let's look at part of this:

1

And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak unto thee.
2

And the spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and set me upon my feet, that I heard him that spake unto me.
3

And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day.
4

For they are impudent children and stiffhearted. I do send thee unto them; and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD.
5

And they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear, (for they are a rebellious house,) yet shall know that there hath been a prophet among them.
6

And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
7

And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.
8

But thou, son of man, hear what I say unto thee; Be not thou rebellious like that rebellious house: open thy mouth, and eat that I give thee.
9


And when I looked, behold, an hand was sent unto me; and, lo, a roll of a book was therein;
10

And he spread it before me; and it was written within and without: and there was written therein lamentations, and mourning, and woe.

Ezek 3:1-

1

Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, eat that thou findest; eat this roll, and go speak unto the house of Israel.
2

So I opened my mouth, and he caused me to eat that roll.
3

And he said unto me, Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee. Then did I eat it; and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.
4

And he said unto me, Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them.
5

For thou art not sent to a people of a strange speech and of an hard language, but to the house of Israel;
6

Not to many people of a strange speech and of an hard language, whose words thou canst not understand. Surely, had I sent thee to them, they would have hearkened unto thee.
7

But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted.
8

Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.
9

As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
10


Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, all my words that I shall speak unto thee receive in thine heart, and hear with thine ears.
11

And go, get thee to them of the captivity, unto the children of thy people, and speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear.
12

Then the spirit took me up, and I heard behind me a voice of a great rushing, saying, Blessed be the glory of the LORD from his place.

Here we have a "hand" giving the scroll to Ezekiel and it forced him to eat of the scroll. The book was sweet to his mouth but he says nothing about it being bitter to his stomach later after eating. Ezekiel is sent to the house of Israel to give them God's words ( the scroll ) . Clearly, this is not a parallel allusion. It has some similarities but is enough different to make me wonder if the context of these verse need to be applied in Rev 10 or not. Questionable I'd say.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[OntheDL]

I agree there is a problem with the timing of the 42 months if we take the text as it stands.

But there is an alternative interpretation, although by no means rock solid.

In the KJV, the text reads:

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months." Revelation 11:2


The translators have inserted a ';' after 'not', and a ":" after Gentiles. This may be significant.


I am no expert on greek grammar, but from Young's Concordance we can see the tenses of these words. Tall is correct in saying that the holy city "shall" they tread is future tense - and if we read this as coming after the measuring, then this is a problem for traditional Adventist thought.


But, I think it is interesting to note that "it is given" would be a much more decisive way of determing whether the 42 months is indeed after the measuring. If the text stated "it will be given to the nations, who will tread..." would be more convincing that the 42 months is after measurment.


The tense of the word 'didomi' - to give - is aorist: "the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time." This is significant, because the angel could just be re-iterating the fact that the nations will tread underfoot for 42 months. The angel would be telling John to measure the temple, leave out the court: (which is given to the nations, and they will tread it underfoot for 42 months) - emphasising a predetermined fact.


On the issue of measurment, Christ said:

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matthew 7:2

It is interesting that the three things instructed by the angel for John to measure - the temple, the altar, and them that worship therein, are the same three things said to have been cleansed or atoned for in Leviticus 16: the holy place, the altar, and the people.

Jon

Jon,

SOP gives a double fulfillment on Rev 11:3-13. Those things shall happen in the cities again.

As for the timing, a better question would be 'is it future tense relative to the measuring or relative to the time of John the Revelator?'

 

[tall73]

Jon,

SOP gives a double fulfillment on Rev 11:3-13. Those things shall happen in the cities again.

As for the timing, a better question would be 'is it future tense relative to the measuring or relative to the time of John the Revelator?'

Let's make it even more simple--who in the text does the measuring?

 

[OntheDL]

Let's make it even more simple--who in the text does the measuring?

Who does the judging? God does.

 

[OntheDL]

The little book in the hand of the angel in Rev 10 get's part of it's Old Testament allusion in Ezek 2&3. Let's look at part of this:

Jim Larmore

Hi Jim,

I don't know if you notice, the little book that was given John in Rev 10 was the book that was sealed til the time of the end in Daniel 12:4 & 9.

The bitter sweet experience was the great disappointment of 1844.

 

[digdeep]

Hi Jim,

I don't know if you notice, the little book that was given John in Rev 10 was the book that was sealed til the time of the end in Daniel 12:4 & 9.

yes and also Rev 5:1-5

The bitter sweet experience was the great disappointment of 1844.

I see this more likely refering to the sweetness of God's glory and victory but the bitterness of seeing God's wrath poured out on those who reject His Son.

DD

 

[tall73]

Who does the judging? God does.

You appear to have missed the question.

Who did the MEASURING in the text?

 

[tall73]

Hi Jim,

I don't know if you notice, the little book that was given John in Rev 10 was the book that was sealed til the time of the end in Daniel 12:4 & 9.

The bitter sweet experience was the great disappointment of 1844.

I can certainly see how someone MIGHT not notice that.

Do you care to show how you reached that conclusion?

Again, I am waiting for a full explanation of the text, including OT allusions, etc.

In any case Jim already hinted that he was aware of that assumption. I think he was looking for evidence.

 

[tall73]

Now, to start with another simple question--who does the text say ate the book?

 

[OntheDL]

You appear to have missed the question.

Who did the MEASURING in the text?

No I didn't. It was shown in a vision.

If you wish to find a way to discredit our believes, you will always find it. Even if it's shown in the plain text which has been the case with you. God does not remove all doubts and thus leaves no room for faith.