What is the sword?

[GLJCA]

Rev 19:11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

Does the Dispy believe that a literal, actual sword is going to come out of Christ's mouth and smite the nations?

We see the same thing said of Christ in Rev. 1
Re 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Does this mean that Jesus is literally going to have a sword coming out of His mouth? If not what is the sword?

Could it be the sword of the Spirit?
Eph 6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

If John was talking about the Word of God coming out of Christ's mouth that smites the nations is that not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Is it harder to believe that the sword is the Word of God that smites the nations than to believe that a literal sword comes out of the mouth of Christ?

GLJCA

 

[A Brother In Christ]

rev 1:16 And he had in his right handf seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword:....

what comes out of his mouth... a word ....to one it is water to another destruction

 

[stratt]

I have to agree with you... it is the sword of the spirit, wich is the word of God.

I personally dont believe that any phisical battles are inside Gods Will for us in the dispensation of Grace.

I would think that most dispys believe that revelations is a book filled with types.... but the bible refers to the things that are types... you cant just invent them.

The sword is the word of God... the bible is clear on that.

 

[eph3Nine]

Regardless of how a dispensationalist would view the sword...Revelation is written to and about the Nation ISRAEL and Gods dealings with HER.

 

[GLJCA]

rev 1:16 And he had in his right handf seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword:....

what comes out of his mouth... a word ....to one it is water to another destruction

So you don't believe that it is literal? Why don't you?

If it is His Word then how does his Word smite the nations?
Also if it is His Word what makes you think the Sword is not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Word of God?

What is the sharp two-edged sword speaking of in
Hbr 4:12-13 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things [are] naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Sounds like this sword cuts to the quick.

What did Paul mean when he said this to the Roman Christians?
Romans 16:20 And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
Is Paul saying thatGod is using the Church of Jesus Christ to crush Satan. Would He be doing that with the Word of God, the gospel?

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

Regardless of how a dispensationalist would view the sword...Revelation is written to and about the Nation ISRAEL and Gods dealings with HER.

I totally agree with you except over to whom Revelation was written.

The book of Revelation is written to the Churches in Asia Minor, not the Jews, concerning that which was going to happen to Israel, not in 2000+ years but within thirty to forty years. That is why God had John to write seven times that what was to happen, would happen shortly or quickly.

GLJCA

 

[Smileyill]

Yes but shortly or quickly doesn't equal "soon."

 

[stratt]

So you don't believe that it is literal? Why don't you?

If it is His Word then how does his Word smite the nations?
Also if it is His Word what makes you think the Sword is not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Word of God?

What is the sharp two-edged sword speaking of in
Hbr 4:12-13 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things [are] naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Sounds like this sword cuts to the quick.

What did Paul mean when he said this to the Roman Christians?
Romans 16:20 And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
Is Paul saying thatGod is using the Church of Jesus Christ to crush Satan. Would He be doing that with the Word of God, the gospel?

GLJCA

Again, the sword isnt litteral, because paul said it isnt. as you also said.

The word smites the nations the same way a word from god made man and all of creation.

It is not the gospel in particualar, because the word is all of the words.... including that wich was brought to us by isaiah.

Pauls was alluding to the romans about things that happen after the millenium, when satan would be thrown into the hell, and hell would be thrown into the bottomless pit.

No he is not saying the church will crush satan. I would totally agree with you though, had i never read Isaiah or the revelation.

Also, having never heard what ephy and company believe about who revelations is addresed to... i would say that i believe it is adressed to the church, not just seven specific churches.... because the number seven... if you look through your bible, is allways a number for perfection or completion.... so it is safe to say, that it is reffering to either the perfect church or the complete church.

The non litteral aspects of revelation are addressed in the bible... if you look.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

So you don't believe that it is literal? Why don't you?

If it is His Word then how does his Word smite the nations?
Also if it is His Word what makes you think the Sword is not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Word of God?

What is the sharp two-edged sword speaking of in
Hbr 4:12-13 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things [are] naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Sounds like this sword cuts to the quick.

What did Paul mean when he said this to the Roman Christians?
Romans 16:20 And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
Is Paul saying thatGod is using the Church of Jesus Christ to crush Satan. Would He be doing that with the Word of God, the gospel?

GLJCA

notice in the garden of Gethsemane ... Jesus said "I AM" and they went backward and fell to the ground...
John 18:6

just showing a bit of His power

 

[GLJCA]

Again, the sword isnt litteral, because paul said it isnt. as you also said.

Stratt,

Paul did not write the book of Revelation. John writes that a sword is coming out of the mouth of Jesus. Dispys say that the book of Revelation is to be taken literally. What method do you use to decide what is literal and what is figurative? If the method that you use is whether the language shows up in other places in the Bible then almost all of the prophetic language used in Revelation shows up in the OT or the gospels.

Example:
Dispys say that the stars in Rev 6 will literally fall from heaven yet the language concerning the sun, moon, and stars show up in the book of Isa 13:9-10 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
This details what happened in 539 BC God sent the Medes to destroy Babylon. This was a actual happening in history, yet we know that the Lord did not come down to earth and the sun, moon and stars did not quit shining. Why is it figurative there but literal in Rev 6:12-13?

Have you ever stopped to consider what would happen if even one star fell on the earth? The Sun is one of the smallest stars in our solar system yet it is much larger than the earth. Also if you notice a star in Rev 9 is given the key to the bottomless pit. Obviously that one isn't literally a star.

My question is what makes one verse figurative and the rest of the book literal? How can you tell what is literal and what is figurative? What method do you use? Most Dispys don't really know why they are to take Revelation literally they just do it, which in turn hinders them from the correct interpretation.

Pauls was alluding to the romans about things that happen after the millenium, when satan would be thrown into the hell, and hell would be thrown into the bottomless pit.

Don't you find it interesting that Paul would tell the Roman Church that God was going to crush Satan with them shortly yet it has been 2000+ years and it still hasn't happened? Did God and Paul lie to them or did something happen in their lifetime that did crush Satan?

GLJCA

 

[stratt]

Rev 19:11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

Does the Dispy believe that a literal, actual sword is going to come out of Christ's mouth and smite the nations?

We see the same thing said of Christ in Rev. 1
Re 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Does this mean that Jesus is literally going to have a sword coming out of His mouth? If not what is the sword?

Could it be the sword of the Spirit?
Eph 6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

If John was talking about the Word of God coming out of Christ's mouth that smites the nations is that not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Is it harder to believe that the sword is the Word of God that smites the nations than to believe that a literal sword comes out of the mouth of Christ?

GLJCA

Stratt,

Paul did not write the book of Revelation. John writes that a sword is coming out of the mouth of Jesus. Dispys say that the book of Revelation is to be taken literally. What method do you use to decide what is literal and what is figurative? If the method that you use is whether the language shows up in other places in the Bible then almost all of the prophetic language used in Revelation shows up in the OT or the gospels.

Example:
Dispys say that the stars in Rev 6 will literally fall from heaven yet the language concerning the sun, moon, and stars show up in the book of Isa 13:9-10 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
This details what happened in 539 BC God sent the Medes to destroy Babylon. This was a actual happening in history, yet we know that the Lord did not come down to earth and the sun, moon and stars did not quit shining. Why is it figurative there but literal in Rev 6:12-13?

Have you ever stopped to consider what would happen if even one star fell on the earth? The Sun is one of the smallest stars in our solar system yet it is much larger than the earth. Also if you notice a star in Rev 9 is given the key to the bottomless pit. Obviously that one isn't literally a star.

My question is what makes one verse figurative and the rest of the book literal? How can you tell what is literal and what is figurative? What method do you use? Most Dispys don't really know why they are to take Revelation literally they just do it, which in turn hinders them from the correct interpretation.


Don't you find it interesting that Paul would tell the Roman Church that God was going to crush Satan with them shortly yet it has been 2000+ years and it still hasn't happened? Did God and Paul lie to them or did something happen in their lifetime that did crush Satan?

GLJCA

I realize that john wrote revelations, but it is paul who claims that the sword is the word of God.... therefore, if you see a sword comming out of gods mouth.... it is safe to assume that it is not litteral.

The easiest way to see if something is figurative or not, is too look at the context. If it says that the stars will fall to earth, But in reality that would be to devestating for the earth to bear, then you could assume that the stars are representitive of angels.... I would think it is not that hard to figure out. I dont know who specifically of the dispensationalists believe that the book is litteral, but i will say this, " the bible interprets the bible."

I am curious to how you think the roman church crushed satan...... from what i can see... the church in rome has been the most gracious towards satan i.e. the roman catholic church..... did they try to kill him with kindness?

Satan is still uncrushed and running around.... he will be bound for a time and then loosed again.... then thrown into hell with his angels.

Also.... you seem to think that "soon" to god is the same as it is too us.... a thousand years is but a day to god..... therefore, two days have passed since he said the word "soon." Two days is not very long.

 

[Tertius]

Also.... you seem to think that "soon" to god is the same as it is too us.... a thousand years is but a day to god..... therefore, two days have passed since he said the word "soon." Two days is not very long.

The passage to go with Stratt's comment:

II Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
II Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

So you don't believe that it is literal? Why don't you?

If it is His Word then how does his Word smite the nations?
Also if it is His Word what makes you think the Sword is not speaking of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Word of God?

What is the sharp two-edged sword speaking of in
Hbr 4:12-13 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things [are] naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Sounds like this sword cuts to the quick.

What did Paul mean when he said this to the Roman Christians?
Romans 16:20 And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
Is Paul saying thatGod is using the Church of Jesus Christ to crush Satan. Would He be doing that with the Word of God, the gospel?

GLJCA

after He uses a word to slay them as He walks thru the valley filled with blood his clothes will get bloody

 

[GLJCA]

The easiest way to see if something is figurative or not, is too look at the context. If it says that the stars will fall to earth, But in reality that would be to devestating for the earth to bear, then you could assume that the stars are representitive of angels.... I would think it is not that hard to figure out. I dont know who specifically of the dispensationalists believe that the book is litteral, but i will say this, " the bible interprets the bible."

I agree that the Bible should interpret the Bible. I also think that our interpretation should include historical data. A good example is the verse in Isa 13 that I presented concerning the sun, moon, and stars that historically happened at the destruction of Babylon by the Medes in 539BC.

Historical data can also prove that prophecy has been fulfilled. Example, Jesus prophesied that the temple would be torn down and Jerusalem would be destroyed in Matt 24 and it was in 70AD, which was about 40 years from that time.

My question is why is it harder to believe that the "soon", "the time is at hand", "must shortly be done", that John was talking about in Rev. 1:1, 1:3, 22:6,22:7, 22:10, 22:12, 22:20, was within 40 years than it is to believe that it is 2000+ years?

John wrote to the Churches in Asia Minor about something that was going to affect them not something that would not happen for 2000+ years. Why would God inspire John to write something to those churches that would not affect them or anyone else for 2000+years? That is not logical.

I am curious to how you think the roman church crushed satan...... from what i can see... the church in rome has been the most gracious towards satan i.e. the roman catholic church..... did they try to kill him with kindness?

We know that Satan's head was crushed by Christ on the cross. The strong man was bound and his house was ravaged at that time, where Christ took back, from the devil, the keys to death and hell.

Paul is giving to the Roman church a promise of God. The promise is victory over Satan. Not a victory that they can accomplish in their own strenght but a victory that God will accomplish for them. Within a few years from that time the Roman Christians and all the Christians in the known world would be going through intense persecution by Nero Cesear and the Roman government. Even amongst the persecution, the gospel was going out and the church grew by leaps and bounds. The more Christians Nero killed, the more the gospel went out and the Church grew, which I believe is what Paul was talking about.

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

The passage to go with Stratt's comment:

II Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
II Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Again I have to ask why it is easier to believe that the "soon" that John was talking about is 2000+ years away when he was writing to seven churches that were going to be persecuted intensely by Nero Cesear in a few years.

Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings [are] faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

John was the messenger or angel that God used to show His servants what was going to happen in their day not something 2000+ years away that would not affect them at all.

GLJCA

 

[A Brother In Christ]

My question is why is it harder to believe that the "soon", "the time is at hand", "must shortly be done", that John was talking about in Rev. 1:1, 1:3, 22:6,22:7, 22:10, 22:12, 22:20, was within 40 years than it is to believe that it is 2000+ years?

GLJCA

2 peter 3:8 But beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

psalms 90:4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past. and as a watch in the night.

God in the third heaven is outside of time...