|
Post by rt on Aug 30, 2018 18:13:45 GMT -6
Definitely not! Here's something we definitely agree on Jesus is still incarnate, though glorified, so I think His normative appearance is now like "a son of man"—albeit a very, very glorious one (the most glorious of all!). But if He wants to look like a seven-horned lamb, He most certainly can (and did!). So this is in fact part of the point I was making. The fact that He appeared as a lamb "as if slain" has no bearing on the timing of when He appeared as such. Regardless of what He appeared as, He was/is in Heaven when John saw what He saw, which means Jesus had already ascended and been glorified. He was no longer slain—though He once was. Ah, that makes more sense now and I can better understand your perspective. I'd just add that if, in fact, Scripture teaches that the elders are humans, that would present a problem. Here's an informative quote from Got Questions?: Blessings to you. Hi Gary, thanks for taking the time to answer some of my points to your points, So I would like to make another point to this current point that you are pointing to Repeating this part of your quote here : I believe that Jesus did not just change His appearance here, but that He was actually showing John the moment when He entered heaven as the slain Lamb, after overcoming the world and death. After making atonement for mankind. I disagree that the way He appears has no bearing on the timing of this event. I think the very fact that His appearance is vastly different than the glorified appearance when John first encounters Him is very significant. It isn't just the appearance that has significance. The point is that what Jesus did on the cross makes it possible for the scroll to be opened. It is very obvious that as John was witness to events unfolding in heaven after being called up there, that at first there was no one worthy to open the scroll- NO ONE- anywhere. Then the Lamb enters as slain, and is worthy. We are told what has made Him worthy- He overcame and redeemed mankind. The Lamb enters after accomplishing this task. Jesus was not in heaven when John first arrived. John gives us a greatly detailed description of what he sees there, in obedience to Christ he writes everything down, yet John makes no mention of Jesus being there, he sees one sitting on the throne, presumably the Father. We know this because later we are told that after the lamb enters the scene He takes the scroll from the right hand of Him who sits on the throne. John was plucked up and plunked down into a past event. Since we all agree that heaven exists outside of time, I think we can concede this possibility. Just because we cannot understand how he could travel through time, doesn't mean that John in this instance couldn't. In fact we know for certain that he traveled forward to see future events, so why is it so difficult to recognize that he could also be shown past events as they happened in heaven? As for the 24 elders, I see no reason why they cannot be some kind of spiritual entity. I never said they were angels, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be some other form of being? How do we know what other kinds of spiritual beings there are? Isn't it possible that there are other orders of heavenly beings that God has not told us about in His word until this point? The quote you shared is somewhat presumptive in my opinion: First of all golden crowns are never promised to the church, a crown yes, but never described as golden. By the way the locusts from the pit in Revelation 9:7 are seen wearing crowns of gold. So this claim that only members of the church wear them is not accurate. Yes the word "crown" can be interpreted as "victor's crown" but many fail to realize it can also be interpreted as "a mark of royal or exalted rank". Which is how I would interpret it in this case. Again the high priest wore a crown made of gold while he ministered in the temple/sanctuary. The high priests are the only other "elders" that ever were instructed by God to wear a gold crown, one with the words "holy to the Lord" inscribed on it. The High priest also was instructed to wear white garments of fine linen when he entered the holy of holies on the day of atonement. Also there was a council of elders made up of high priests who served as judges. These elders met in a place called the chamber of hewn stone on the temple mount, where they sat on thrones. The heavenly temple serves as the pattern for the earthly temple. This is not something I made up, it is scripture. Also there are many instances of angels being shown wearing white dazzling garments. Just because something is commonly known to us as being true of men on earth doesn't mean it cannot also be true of beings who reside in the heavenly dimension. That is a very lame argument in my opinion. It's like saying only old women wear wide brimmed hats, because in my culture I only ever see old women wearing these hats and never anyone else. Just because it might be common doesn't mean that others don't wear the same hats. In fact in certain countries many young men wear wide brimmed hats. There is no reason whatsoever to assume that the 24 elders represent the church. John definitely does not say they are, they themselves do not say they are. There are also only 24 of them, which has no relationship to the church and would seem to contradict the immensity of the multitude that must actually be the risen church. I have read some pretty convoluted reasons why there are only 24 of them seen by John. In fact the number earlier associated with the church is seven, when John sees the lampstands earlier. If anything in the throne room relates to the churches IMO the seven lamps of fire that burn before the throne are a better candidate. What is a lampstand after all without a lamp? Edited to add:How would you explain the change in the description of the seven spirits of God? First seen as flames of fire around the throne and after the Lamb enters, now they are seen as seven horns with seven eyes on the head of the Lamb? Why this change? What happened that caused this change? The elders and creatures are first praising the one on the throne, but then they are praising the Lamb and the one who sits on the throne. John is completely distraught, but then he is told not to be. A book is handed off as well, why? Why did the Lamb take the book from the right hand of the one on the throne? There is a new song song, one not sung before the Lamb enters, hence the term "new" to describe it. The words to that song tell us the reason for the change. The song wasn't sung, and now it is, why this change? It is a cause and effect scenario. Something causes these changes, it isn't just simply an appearance change. It is an event. Blessings to you as well feel free to make some new points about my new points.....
|
|
|
Post by venge on Aug 31, 2018 7:15:49 GMT -6
RT,
You and I are in one agreement with your analysis in the above post. How can it be seen any other way? John is looking through the portal of time and views heaven without Christ. Then Christ enters slain. It is an event change because at that moment he is given authority, power, riches etc to which did not previously belong to him.
John witnesses the transformation from prophet to priest and later to king. I won’t write anymore because I think you ended it right where I would. Brilliant deduction with the number 7 of churches vs 24 elders! I’m surprised you didn’t mention many versions, and most proper translations, read the elders say “they” and “them” and not “us” and “we”. Because that puts an end to the debate.
|
|
|
Post by rt on Aug 31, 2018 7:48:21 GMT -6
RT, You and I are in one agreement with your analysis in the above post. How can it be seen any other way? John is looking through the portal of time and views heaven without Christ. Then Christ enters slain. It is an event change because at that moment he is given authority, power, riches etc to which did not previously belong to him. John witnesses the transformation from prophet to priest and later to king. I won’t write anymore because I think you ended it right where I would. Brilliant deduction with the number 7 of churches vs 24 elders! I’m surprised you didn’t mention many versions, and most proper translations, read the elders say “they” and “them” and not “us” and “we”. Because that puts an end to the debate. I understand how it can be seen in other ways, because I myself once did. It all comes down to the foundation you lay for interpretation. I had always been taught the same views proposed by many here concerning the pre-trib rapture. That was the foundation I had when I started studying prophecy. But the more I studied on my own, the more problems I had with that view. For a while I considered the mid trib rapture view, because that seemed to make more sense. But then I found conflicts in that view also. I came to understand that a pre trib view can be shown that reconciles both of these other views, though there are few others who see it the same, and I cannot be dogmatic about it either. But to me it really does make the most sense. I tend to look at scripture logically and literally. Though I do understand there are many symbols used to describe things and often the passage tells us what is meant by them. Other times we are left to speculation. The trouble with speculating is that we can ascribe whatever meaning to things that seems to fit our view and is supported by our foundation of understanding. That can be problematic, and I admit that I am guilty of speculating along with many others. However I do try to speculate through the lens of scripture, looking to other passages that might shed light on the ones that are hard to understand. Once I saw what I believe is happening here in Revelation 4/5, it became so obvious to me. Now I cannot see how I ever saw it any other way. But I did, so I understand how others can too.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 31, 2018 11:00:10 GMT -6
But I must make a further point pointing to the point that you are now pointing to! And this is the gist of your whole point. Respectfully, it seems to me to be based on a grand assumption and reading between the lines. I don't think that's necessarily the best way to handle the text. If problems are found with your assumption(s), it may undermine your theory and timeline. In John's vision a thorough search was made in heaven, earth, and under the earth to find someone worthy to open the scroll, but no one was found. The Lamb shows up (in the scene) and is found worthy to open the scroll. As far as the timing goes, that's all we know about the Lamb's appearance (although you also brought up some intriguing points about the Seven Spirits / Holy Spirit in your post edit). Let's consider some of the assumptions you've made and some of the things not being fully dealt with (imho). Assumptions:#1 - This can only be a vision of the past. #2 - The only way to interpret this "between the lines" is that Jesus had not yet ascended when the search was made and only recently ascended when John sees Him in v. 6. #3 - The elders are non-human. Now, it seems to me that those three assumptions taken together form a very narrow/specific argument and if problems are found with it you will be left standing on shaky ground. As far as I can tell you are only offering one possibility, but there are several others. Consider: Regarding assumption #1:1. This could be a vision of the future. 2. This could be a vision of the past and the future. 3. This may not have been a vision at all. God may have literally raptured John into Heaven. Heaven time ≠ earth time. (My preference in combination with #2). Regarding assumption #2:1. Perhaps the point of Rev. 5:1–10 is not that Jesus just now shows up, but that no one was found worthy to open the scroll except for Jesus. 2. Perhaps there is a long period of time between v. 6 and v. 7, of which there is strong biblical precedent (e.g. Dan. 9:26–27; Isa. 61:1–2; Lk. 4:18–19) 3. Perhaps John was literally raptured to Heaven (the plain sense of the text), which means Jesus had already ascended, and since heaven time ≠ earth time, what seems like a few moments for John is several thousand years on earth. In other words, he witnessed several events unfold. First, the glorification of Christ, second, Jesus sending the Holy spirit (v. 6b), and third, the Lamb taking the scroll (v. 7; shortly after the rapture of the Church). This would be my preference, or some combination with #2. And notice regarding your post edit about the Seven Spirits, that the chronological order presented in Rev. 5:1–7 fits just as easily with my view (elders = raptured Church; seals not opened until after the rapture). Regarding assumption #3:1. The 24 elders represent the collective Gospel Church / Church of the Firstborn (and yes there are reasons for thinking this; I wrote a whole article on it) 2. The 24 elders represent the collective of Old and New Testament saints. 3. John literally saw 24 elders sitting on thrones. These 24 were members of the collective Church that had been raptured to Heaven. (My preference in combination with #1). We both have to make certain assumptions about the elders since there is no verse that explicitly says "the elders represent the Church," or "the elders are angelic beings." Since we both have to make certain assumptions, the real question is, which assumptions are more Scriptural? How is Scripture leading us to interpret them?Could they be angels? Perhaps. Can God create other kinds of heavenly entities? Of course. But those questions don't lead us to the answer. The question is: who are the elders? And here is what we know: - The 24 seated on thrones are called "elders." The word is used in Scripture exclusively for 1. human men, 2. leaders in human governments like local churches, the Sanhedrin, etc.
- Etymologically, the word presbuteros means an "aged man" or "mature man."
- A presbuteros is someone with ruling/judging authority. These 24 elders are seated on thrones. Rulers and kings sit on thrones. Thus they are 24 beings with ruling authority. Jesus had just promised to the overcoming Christians that they would rule the nations (Rev. 2:26–27).
- The elders sit on thrones. Jesus had just promised to the overcoming Christians that they would sit on God's throne (Rev. 3:21).
- The elders wear crowns—specifically stephanos, which properly interpreted are the garlands placed on the heads of victors in the Grecian competitions. Jesus had just promised to the overcoming Christians that they would be given these stephanos crowns (Rev. 2:10).
- The elders wear white garments (himation). In Scripture garments thematically represent Christ's imputed righteousness and/or God's covering over of sin. Jesus had just promised to the overcoming Christians that they would be given white garments (Rev. 3:5).
- Contrary to what Venge stated in reply to you, the best/most extensive manuscript evidence we have is that the elders sing in Rev. 5:9:
Now, John had just gotten through recording a series of specific promises Jesus had made to overcoming Christians. Then he is raptured to Heaven. The very first thing he sees is God on His throne surrounded by a group of beings possessing the very things Jesus promised to overcoming Christians. Furthermore, the word he uses to describe these beings possessing the very things promised by Jesus to Christians is "elders," which on the basis of the scriptural evidence has only ever meant mature/aged human men. So I don't need to entertain 'what ifs' about the elders because all of the evidence points in only one direction (imho). Lastly, regarding the elders, I perused through dozens of historical commentaries on Revelation 4 and every single one of them that I found understood the elders to be either: 1. The Church of the Firstborn 2. The Church + Old Testament saints Note that some of these commentators are ambiguous about the timing of the rapture or hold to historical protestant views on it and they still understood the plain teaching of Scripture to be that the elders were members of the Church or represented the Church. BibleHub actually has a great summation of a few of these here. Regarding the number of the elders (24): I've already provided two specific and direct examples from Scripture where 24 represents a whole. In 1 Chronicles 24, King David, a type of Christ, divided the priestly service into 24 courses, but there were of course far, far more than only 24 priests. The Church is called a royal priesthood and a kingdom of priests (1 Pet. 2:9; and, I believe, Rev. 5:10). Then in 1 Chronicles 25, King David divides the 288 worshipers in the Temple into 24 (again, representing the whole). Finally, as many of those linked commentaries have pointed out (and as I have, as well), 24 is the perfect number to represent the Church, which is composed of Jews and Gentiles—Jews from the 12 sons of Jacob, and Gentiles from the 12 apostles of the Lamb. This combination of 24 is even hinted at in Revelation 24 in the 12 foundations of the city (with the names of the 12 apostles) and the 12 gates of the city (with the names of the 12 tribes of Israel). Could the number 7 represent the Church? Sure, why not. But like the question raised about the elders being angels, it's kind of a diversion. The question at hand is: why 24? '7' is used frequently in Revelation, but so are twelves and multiples of twelves. There were seven churches in Asia Minor, but at the time of the Revelation there were churches in many other areas, as well (Italia, Greece, North Africa, Israel, Syria, etc). It is actually twelves and multiples of twelves that represent the whole New Jerusalem, the city inhabited by the Church. It's this city which is explicitly called the wife of the Lamb. Another small point of interest: using the best available data we have regarding the Crude Death Rate (CDR) of each generation from the time the Church began until now, and factoring in apostasy and pseudo-Christian sects, there have been somewhere in the range of 4–5 billion Christians. So what happens when we actually include both 24 and 7? 24^7 is 4.5 billion. I'm not offering that as demonstrable proof of anything from Scripture, just thought it was interesting. You're mistaken on that. As a matter of fact, of the 23 MSS that constitute the Majority Text, not a single one of them uses the third person pronoun in v. 9. 22 of the 23 MSS use the second person pronoun hemas "us" and 1 MS omits the pronoun (Codex Alexandrinus). The overwhelming manuscript evidence we have is actually the opposite of what you're saying. In fact, the second person pronoun hemas is what is used, which means "us" (or depending on usage—"we"). Thus, Rev. 5:9 is actually more than just circumstantial because if in fact the pronoun is "us," going with the literal/plain sense of the text, the elders declare themselves to have been redeemed by the blood of the Lamb and to have come from every "kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation," which means they must have been redeemed from the earth and they must represent more than just 24 individuals. In summary on the elders: their name "elders," their number (24), and their rulership, thrones, crowns, and garments constitute very strong circumstantial evidence that they are, in fact, members of and/or representative of the whole Church. But Revelation 5:9 is more than circumstantial. It is direct scriptural evidence that they are blood-bought human beings. The elephant in the room: what's amazing to me about the timing of the seals debate, is what to me seems like the rather large elephant in the room. Factoring in the overall chronological layout of Revelation, John's rapture is perfectly placed and nothing else in the entire book more perfectly mirrors other scriptural descriptions of the rapture than Revelation 4:1–2. To me, those two verses are obvious parallel, though I recognize not everyone sees them that way. And that's fine with me. I don't have to win the debate or be right, but as I see it now, you have a Christian raptured through a doorway into Heaven at the sound of a trumpet, before the Tribulation chapters (6–19) and it comes immediately after the Church Age chapters (2–3) and from Revelation 4-on, the Church is never again explicitly mentioned until Chapter 22. I hope my view(s) make sense and please let me know if I need to clarify anything. In short, I actually agree (or am at least open to the possibility) that part of what John sees in the first few verses of Chapter 5 took place shortly after Jesus ascended, but the overall evidence and context more readily fits with the elders representing the Church and the seals not opening until after the rapture. Heaven time ≠ earth time. And John was literally raptured, a possibility only made available by Jesus' previous ascension. Blessings to you both and maranatha!
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on Aug 31, 2018 11:21:37 GMT -6
2. This could be a vision of the past and the future. It has to be, doesn't it?
"See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed" v5 Christ's crucifixion "The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth." v 6b the great commission "Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!” V13 all's well that ends well! This being after the thousand year reign and the final putting away of Satan and the Great White Throne Judgement.
|
|
|
Post by venge on Aug 31, 2018 12:54:08 GMT -6
Contrary to what Venge said? Ok I’ll bite! I had said the text uses “they” and “them” and not “us” and “we”. This is correct when I was referring to the text that reads in the second half of verse 9 and vs 10. This is correct because ALL manuscripts read “made them” and “they will reign” as I stated. It is common for pre Trib doctrine followers to place emphasis on the KJV reading of this as “us” and “we” which the manuscripts don’t agree on. Using this as a way to say Aha! See, they were made priests and they (the 24 elders) will reign on earth. This is incorrect. The opening “us” used I did not debate. As you said, that agrees with all manuscripts. That is correct.
The 24 elders separating themselves from the resurrection saying THEY will....and made THEM shows they are not the raptured at the end time. They specifically point out a difference.
The first “us” is used because imo, the elders were before God worshiping him. Now a lamb appears and now they follow the lamb. The worship is directed at him now as Christ has redeemed ALL to him.
|
|
|
Post by rt on Aug 31, 2018 14:11:35 GMT -6
Gary said: ha ha! Glad you have a sense of humor. And again thank you very much for your well thought out reply. Now more pointing to points! Well respectfully is seems to me that your point(s) is based on a grand assumption and reading between the lines, and if you do not think it is the best way to handle the text then your own theory is suspect as well. Let's consider some of the assumptions you've made and some of the things not being fully dealt with (imho). Assumptions: #1 - This cannot be a vision of the past alone #2 - The only way to interpret this "between the lines" is that Jesus had ascended and that the search that was made is either some future event or some combination of past and future events or a future event altogether. #3 - The elders are human. Now, it seems to me that those three assumptions taken together form a very narrow/specific argument and if problems are found with it you will be left standing on shaky ground. I notice that the vision being of the past is not an option for you, why is that? if you prefer option 2, what elements do you believe are the past and what are the future? And aren't you basing that idea on assumption, which you claim is shaky ground? Isn't it also an assumption that John is actually physically raptured into heaven? And why would that even make a difference? Even if he was, that has no bearing whatsoever on when the Rapture (big R) happens or is depicted. Unless of course you are now claiming that John is symbolic for the raptured church, but if so, what does that mean for the 24 elders? Do they both represent the rapture somehow? 1. You can assume that if you like, but I rather think that there is more than one point being made. If NO ONE anywhere at that moment was worthy, then isn't it also true that at that moment Jesus was not worthy either? It is illogical to say NO ONE was worthy and at the same time SOMEONE is worthy. Those two images are opposed to one another, they cannot both be true at the same time, unless of course you don't consider Jesus to be "anyone"? 2. You are claiming that there is a huge time gap in events that John sees between the appearing of the Lamb standing in heaven as slain and the moment he takes the scroll from the right hand of He who sits on the Throne? That is a very big assumption. As for your precedent I believe the verses you posted are really apples to oranges, or maybe limes to lemons. The gap between the 69th and 70th week? The time period between the redemption and the judgment? And Jesus quoting the Isaiah passage? Well He Himself said that He fulfilled that on that exact day. He did proclaim release to those in captivity, He did heal the blind, He did set free the oppressed and He proclaimed the favorable year of the Lord. I don't even understand how that one proves your point. I don't think these verses show precedence for what you are claiming at all, sorry maybe I am missing something ? What we have here in verse 6 and 7 is not an assumed gap in time, but Jesus ascending and being handed the kingdom. He takes the scroll from He who sits on the throne. The Father hands Him authority to rule. Authority is granted to open the scroll, because He is worthy now to do so. The father has the scroll and then hands it to the Lamb that was slain. I have already explained earlier in this thread when that happens but to refresh your memory and so you don't have to scroll to find it These passages to me and many more like them, show superior precedence to what is going on in the passage. Yes I make the assumption that God the Father is giving the Kingdom to the Son. But I believe that the scroll being given to the Lamb (Jesus) is obvious evidence of that happening. There is no gap of time between Jesus ascending and assuming His place at God's right hand. The reference to the "right hand" also serves as a calling card that tells us that this is what is happening. 3. Again I fail to see how the idea of John being raptured, if indeed he was, proves anything. Of course Jesus was already ascended. It is the voice of the ascended Jesus that calls John into the heavenly tabernacle. I have no problem with that. However it doesn't mean that what John sees upon his arrival is current or future to his day. In the blink of an eye, John could be moved back in time to see an event from the past could he not? Is time linear in the heavenly dimension? I would say no,since John is easily and swiftly transported to various future points of time. As for your timeline- John saw Jesus first on earth, in his time present. (That we agree on) But you missed one- John next sees Jesus as the slain Lamb, who sends the Holy Spirit (wasn't the sending of the Holy Spirit only made possible when Christ was resurrected?) and thirdly the Lamb takes the scroll (Jesus assumes the throne) Then the Lamb begins to remove the seals, the first four of which could have already been removed, since their effects are obviously already at play on the earth, seals 5 and six are opened, which I believe represent the resurrection of the dead in Christ followed by those who are caught up (the rapture). seal 7- the 70th week begins. I actually do think Daniel's prophecy of the 70th week is relevant, though not in the same way you do. John would have understood that Jesus had fulfilled this part of the prophecy, Jesus was cut off after the 62 weeks and Jerusalem had been destroyed. This part of the prophecy only shows Jesus's death. It doesn't reveal His resurrection and glorification, but it is the pivotal event that serves as the hinge which makes the fulfillment of Daniel's 70th week possible. I believe that is why John is shown the ascension of Jesus before he is shown future events, because it is the single most pivotal event to happen in heaven or on earth ever. All of history hinges on it and the future reign of Jesus on earth depends on it. We have been over this one several times, but these are also assumptions regarding assumption #3 I have also done considerable study on this point and would be happy to share it if you wish. I think you already know what my preference is. So the assumption then is that because this word is only ever used to describe men on earth it cannot therefore be used to describe any other form of being. Perhaps these entities are ancient. Perhaps they have been around since creation. Isn't God Himself known as the ancient of days? The word Elder can be used as a term to denote rank or office. Again definitions are sometimes chosen to reflect one's point of view. There you have it- rank and authority. totally agree with you on this one, yes Jesus did promise the church that they would rule and for sure they will. I see that taking place here After the 70th week- Daniel also talks about this The "saints" don't begin to rule with Christ until the ancient of Days comes and judgment is passed in their favor. Here also we see when this happens: After the court sits for judgment, hmm... a court that sits and judges??? Just saying. then the kingdom is given to the saints. It doesn't happen before the 70th week starts or after it begins or anytime during the 70th week, it happens after it, after the that little boastful horn is judged and annihilated and destroyed forever. I have already specifically addressed these issues. But could elaborate at some future time, frankly I am running out of steam on my end, got a head cold....yuk, just in time for a visit from my daughter too. I already shared why I don't see either way it is phrased as a conflict. **I do have one question for you though before I go, if you do not see the Lamb standing as slain as the ascension of the Lamb into the heavenly Tabernacle, then why do you believe Jesus appears as He does. What does it signify to you? Why is there a new song sung at the time you believe it to be if not in the past? I will have to stop here, need to get some things accomplished around this house of mine before my daughter gets here, starting with cleaning my pool, followed by making dinner, putting away laundry and cleaning the litter box. I would so love to have time to continue, but duty calls. Thanks Gary for taking the time to read and respond. I enjoy this game of volleyball. Hope to pick it up sometime in the near future. Thank you too for hosting such a great site, where different points of view are welcomed and discussed. So glad I stumbled upon it. Keep up the good work!
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 31, 2018 14:45:29 GMT -6
Contrary to what Venge said? Ok I’ll bite! I had said the text uses “they” and “them” and not “us” and “we”. This is correct when I was referring to the text that reads in the second half of verse 9 and vs 10. This is correct because ALL manuscripts read “made them” and “they will reign” as I stated. It is common for pre Trib doctrine followers to place emphasis on the KJV reading of this as “us” and “we” which the manuscripts don’t agree on. Using this as a way to say Aha! See, they were made priests and they (the 24 elders) will reign on earth. This is incorrect. The opening “us” used I did not debate. As you said, that agrees with all manuscripts. That is correct. The 24 elders separating themselves from the resurrection saying THEY will....and made THEM shows they are not the raptured at the end time. They specifically point out a difference. The first “us” is used because imo, the elders were before God worshiping him. Now a lamb appears and now they follow the lamb. The worship is directed at him now as Christ has redeemed ALL to him. Hmm. I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but I stand by what I said above: I'm not sure what you mean by this: What second half of v. 9 are you referring to? I assume you're saying verse 10, only? There are only two pronouns in v. 9: hemas ("us") and sou ("you"). The "you" refers to the Lamb (as the one who purchased the elders by His blood: in the Greek, literally "purchased us [ hemas] to God by the blood of you [ sou]...") Yes, that's exactly correct—in v. 10 only. It's "they" and "them." The "they" is the pronoun and "them" is based on the conjugation of basileuó. But in v. 9 the pronoun is US in ALL MSS (22), except for Codex Alexadrinus (1) where it is simply omitted due to a copyist error (neither "us" nor "them"). So the overwhelming MS evidence is "us" in v. 9 and "they" in v. 10. Well the King James and Young's Literal actually get it right in v. 9 with "us," whereas numerous modern translations choose, against all evidence, to go with Codex Alexadrinus in v. 9, which omits the pronoun entirely. Then they simply interpose whatever they want in v. 9 in place of "us" ( them, people, men, etc). Seems like translators should have trusted what the MSS were, as written rather than assume. When we correctly translate "us" in v. 9 and "they" in v. 10, the plain, literal sense is that either the four living creatures or the elders were redeemed to God by the blood of the Lamb (the only two groups singing vv. 9–10). Any other interpretation is twisting the plain words and their plain meaning. Either the four living creatures or the elders sing to the Lamb: Two groups are singing and the words they sing are recorded in vv. 9–10. Since someone is singing "us" and someone is singing "they" and two groups are singing, you're only left with two options if you're going to accept the text as written: 1. The elders sing v. 9 and the 4 living creatures sing v. 10. 2. The 4 living creatures sing v. 9 and the elders sing v. 10. I choose option #1. It's amazing how important, and conclusive, a single pronoun becomes. I would encourage you to read your last post. It would be hard for anyone to interpret you as only dealing with v. 10. You made a blanket statement. This doesn't make sense. What are you trying to say? The "us" is used as follows: Either the elders or the living creatures sing these words. On the preponderance of evidence it's the elders, but either way you slice it, there is a group in Heaven who had been redeemed out of " every kindred, and tongue, and people [ laos - human people], and nation." And these human people in Heaven are singing praise to the Lamb on the Throne before the Lamb opens Seal #1.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 31, 2018 15:44:57 GMT -6
Ok, I'll admit this thread is beginning to concern me in tone and I think I'm not necessarily helping, for which I apologize. Sometimes it's difficult to do the back-and-forth without seeming tit-for-tat. For the way I've come across and may be coming across below, will you please forgive me? My purpose in this is not to persuade you or Venge, but merely to be respected for having an alternative view. A few of the things said ( perhaps by me, as well) come close to invalidation, which goes against Rule #3. I simply wish for others to realize that the traditional, pre-trib, pre-millennial view can withstand scrutiny. I see the elders' identity and the timing of the opening of the seals as important and I want others to consider both sides on the preponderance of evidence and make up their own minds. I actually arrived at the traditional view after my own extensive research and dropping many other beliefs that I had, just as you arrived at yours. You don't need to agree with my conclusions, but I hope we can mutually agree that both sides are well thought out. Both sides make assumptions. Sometimes the result you get is based on which assumptions are emphasized. For you, the assumption of when John sees what he sees in Chapter 5 is very important. For me, that piece is not as important because it doesn't matter as much to me whether the Lamb slain was a vision of the past, the past and the future, or John having a literal jaunt through timeless Heaven. I can reconcile the different timings with the view that the elders are the Church and the seals haven't opened yet. If you reread my post, the point I was making was two-fold: 1. We both make certain assumptions. The question is then which is supported by the bulk of scriptural and contextual evidence? 2. I offered several alternative interpretations where we need to "fill in the blank" whereas you were offering one. I don't have my heart set on any of them and hold them loosely, because I'm not particularly interested in filling in the blanks. I'm looking for direct, scriptural answers wherever possible. However you interpret the timing of Rev. 5:1–6 is an assumption because the text doesn't explicitly say. However, how you interpret Rev. 5:9 is not just an assumption because the text is explicit. Also, I would argue that since overcoming Christians are explicitly promised 1. authority, 2. stephanos, 3. himation, 4. thrones, and 5. a pre-trib escape in Rev. 2–3, the fact that the elders are seen with all five of these promises in the very next chapter is probably more than just circumstantial evidence that the elders represent the Church or are individual members of it. I don't think it's possible for the entire vision to be in the past, but I did mention that part of it being in the past is possible (perhaps up to v. 6). I offered a couple different possibilities (or combination of possibilities) that were my preference. It could be future (Jesus can appear as He wants to, including as a slain Lamb, and the purpose of the text is who not when). It could be past and future. It could be more than just a vision. John may have literally been raptured to Heaven and Heaven's time does not equal earth's time. As to why I don't think it can only be in the past, there are several reasons: 1. The elders represent the Church or are individual members in it. 2. The elders (and John) are in Heaven in the vision, thus post-rapture. 3. The actual time in history when John literally experienced what he experienced was in roughly 90 AD. That was after the crucifixion. After the ascension. After Christ's glorification. After Pentecost. Even after the entirety of Paul's ministry. 4. This is a whole other topic, but I can't reconcile the seals opening pre-rapture/DoTL with Scripture. Especially if you take each of them literally. Sorry if it was unclear. I put Luke and Isaiah next to each other because Jesus was quoting from that passage of Isaiah. Jesus stopped right before the DoTL was prophesied in Isaiah, thus there was a 2,000 year in gap in the fulfillment of that prophecy, just as there was a 2,000 year gap in Dan. 9:26-27. Similar gaps can be found in other places in Isaiah, Amos, and Micah. I wouldn't say it quite that rigidly, but yes. Based on the usage of the word presbuteros in the Bible and its etymology, it very likely only refers to human males. I think it could signify several or many different things, including something similar to your view that at least part of Rev. 5 was a look into the past, but I don't have strong feelings either way. What I do hold to more firmly is this: 1. The Lamb was the only one found worthy to open the seals 2. It is the Lamb who has redeemed "us" (the elders) by His blood The passage is important in both eschatology and soteriology. Jesus is the Lamb, the Savior, who has redeemed men to God and now that the Church has been fully redeemed (at this point in the vision—i.e. including rapture and glorification) then now the Lamb can begin opening the seals. But, the seals, as the beginning of the wrath of the Lamb, cannot be opened until His people are fully redeemed and out of harm's way. Thus, what really precipitates the Lamb opening the seals is twofold: 1. His having been slain and ascending, and... 2. The appearance in Heaven of the 24 elders The Lamb and elders are both the prominent figures/themes in Chapters 4 and 5. The reason the Lamb was slain and ascended ( #1) was to bring about the complete redemption (both spirit and body) of the Church ( #2). Blessings and Maranatha. Love you all.
|
|
|
Post by venge on Aug 31, 2018 16:56:40 GMT -6
Contrary to what Venge said? Ok I’ll bite! I had said the text uses “they” and “them” and not “us” and “we”. This is correct when I was referring to the text that reads in the second half of verse 9 and vs 10. This is correct because ALL manuscripts read “made them” and “they will reign” as I stated. It is common for pre Trib doctrine followers to place emphasis on the KJV reading of this as “us” and “we” which the manuscripts don’t agree on. Using this as a way to say Aha! See, they were made priests and they (the 24 elders) will reign on earth. This is incorrect. The opening “us” used I did not debate. As you said, that agrees with all manuscripts. That is correct. The 24 elders separating themselves from the resurrection saying THEY will....and made THEM shows they are not the raptured at the end time. They specifically point out a difference. The first “us” is used because imo, the elders were before God worshiping him. Now a lamb appears and now they follow the lamb. The worship is directed at him now as Christ has redeemed ALL to him. Hmm. I'm not exactly sure what you're saying, but I stand by what I said above: I'm not sure what you mean by this: What second half of v. 9 are you referring to? I assume you're saying verse 10, only? There are only two pronouns in v. 9: hemas ("us") and sou ("you"). The "you" refers to the Lamb (as the one who purchased the elders by His blood: in the Greek, literally "purchased us [ hemas] to God by the blood of you [ sou]...") Yes, that's exactly correct—in v. 10 only. It's "they" and "them." The "they" is the pronoun and "them" is based on the conjugation of basileuó. But in v. 9 the pronoun is US in ALL MSS (22), except for Codex Alexadrinus (1) where it is simply omitted due to a copyist error (neither "us" nor "them"). So the overwhelming MS evidence is "us" in v. 9 and "they" in v. 10. Well the King James and Young's Literal actually get it right in v. 9 with "us," whereas numerous modern translations choose, against all evidence, to go with Codex Alexadrinus in v. 9, which omits the pronoun entirely. Then they simply interpose whatever they want in v. 9 in place of "us" ( them, people, men, etc). Seems like translators should have trusted what the MSS were, as written rather than assume. When we correctly translate "us" in v. 9 and "they" in v. 10, the plain, literal sense is that either the four living creatures or the elders were redeemed to God by the blood of the Lamb (the only two groups singing vv. 9–10). Any other interpretation is twisting the plain words and their plain meaning. Either the four living creatures or the elders sing to the Lamb: Two groups are singing and the words they sing are recorded in vv. 9–10. Since someone is singing "us" and someone is singing "they" and two groups are singing, you're only left with two options if you're going to accept the text as written: 1. The elders sing v. 9 and the 4 living creatures sing v. 10. 2. The 4 living creatures sing v. 9 and the elders sing v. 10. I choose option #1. It's amazing how important, and conclusive, a single pronoun becomes. I would encourage you to read your last post. It would be hard for anyone to interpret you as only dealing with v. 10. You made a blanket statement. This doesn't make sense. What are you trying to say? The "us" is used as follows: Either the elders or the living creatures sing these words. On the preponderance of evidence it's the elders, but either way you slice it, there is a group in Heaven who had been redeemed out of " every kindred, and tongue, and people [ laos - human people], and nation." And these human people in Heaven are singing praise to the Lamb on the Throne before the Lamb opens Seal #1. Hello Gary, Now that I am at home, I can properly respond on my keyboard then using my thumbs on a phone --eek Let me respond back to you. Question 1: Hmm. I'm not exactly sure what you're saying
My response: The idea behind the KJV is that the 24 elders must be the church because they refer to themselves as having been redeemed and they were made kings/priests to reign on the earth. Previously, when I stated I was referencing the second half, I was referring to verse 10. I think I wrote 9 and 10 out of error as I was trying to rush and was literally at work. My fault and I should have proof read before I hit enter. I agreed the "us" in verse 9 (shown below) has been documented as correct in all manuscripts except Codex Alexandrinus. The point I was trying to make, and rushing it unfortunately, was that in verse 10, all manuscripts agree (except Textus Receptus) against the currently printed KJV. Instead, verse 10 should read as: Can we agree on this? Therefore, the text would read: If the 24 elders were raptured, why would they speak of others than themselves to be a kingdom of priests and that the others should reign on the earth? When I mentioned that they had said Christ redeemed "us", does not Christ redeem all that is in heaven or on the earth that follow him? Even when Christ redeemed all at the cross, in verse 14 it shows his power: You had stated earlier: Either the elders or the living creatures sing these words. On the preponderance of evidence it's the elders, but either way you slice it, there is a group in Heaven who had been redeemed out of "every kindred, and tongue, and people [laos - human people], and nation." And these human people in Heaven are singing praise to the Lamb on the Throne before the Lamb opens Seal #1.I don't disagree with the fact they are singing in heaven nor did I say to the contrary. But I would like to use what you wrote above. You had shown that in verse 9, Rev 7:9-10 What a profound message. Salvation to our God! These saints, a number that cannot be numbered now in heaven from earth. The same 4 identifiers in Rev 7 as in Rev 5. In verse 16-17 the Bible says, Even Isaiah 25:8 shows the same for His people. Or Isaiah 49:10 at the restoration of true Israel to which we are part of the inheritance.. If you accept the translation of Rev 5:10 to be: ...then, the statement is made the elders are not raptured because they are not including themselves in the inheritance left for the saved. That was my point to your question: Hmm. I'm not exactly sure what you're sayingI hope I explained it while I had time to sit and write it. And I don't feel you are being hostile to me, but I felt that I must clarify once more when I got home as after I read my response, it needed a comb over lol. When it comes down to it, is the identity of the 24 elders a requirement for salvation? Nope. Lastly, I enjoy verse 17 in Rev 7. This is referring to the " of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues."What other group could this refer to in the world that Christ will be their shepherd? Jews only? Tribulation saints only? Not the 144k as this comes after them. But a multitude w/out number of all places. I love you Gary, you have a lot of knowledge, no one is doubting that. Like RT stated earlier, I followed the same position as you at one time. Keep studying and praying. That is my hope for all the readers of this site. The Lord will lead each person to specific areas. Ones strength will be another's weakness, but that is why we come here. To add value to the Bible. To search out His truths. To gain understanding. To apply what we gained and then give it to others so it may continue. EDIT: PS, I just worked a 12 hour day with a long drive home. I will be going to bed now =P and waking up at 3:30AM. =( So if there is a reply, I will get it tomorrow when I get home. For those that are not working, its Saturday! Before you do the things you want to do...do what God wants you to do. Go out and ask a neighbor to Church. Go to a few houses and tell people of Jesus. Give him the time in the day before you give it to yourself.
|
|
|
Post by davewatchman on Aug 31, 2018 21:29:39 GMT -6
I can't believe you guys are worried about Revelation 4 and Five and the twenty and 4 elders. I'm more worried about it might be almost time to meet them in the air in for real time. So let my reasonableness be known to all men, for the Lord is at hand. The Revelation throne room scene was the official exaltation of Jesus. This is the same ceremony as told in Daniel 7 and took place on February 20th, 1798 when pope Pius was captured during the French Revolution as the Foxe Book days came to a close. It was then that the Gospel of Jesus could finally go out conquering and to conquer as the white horse Rider with the winners bow. I do concur. Wiki is your friend:If the identity of the 24 seemed hidden from John at the time of the vision, it is was because he was is assigned as one of them. Imagine being taken to Heaven and shown a future vision of yourself and your 11 closest friends sitting on thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. That would give me a headache. I wonder if he would have told Polycarp about it. And on 12 other thrones, 12 of the greatest patriarchs of the Old Testament. I'll let you guys speculate on who the OT 12 are. “You are those who have stayed with me in my trials, and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.“As I looked, thrones were placed,and the Ancient of Days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued and came out from before him; a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the court sat in judgment, and the books were opened.The 24 elders had to be human because they were witness to the restoration of the sanctuary to it's rightful state. In 1844 Jesus began the process of the judgement of the dead in front of the 24 elders and a host of angelic witnesses. "And its rider had a pair of scales in his hand.The scales of the third seal weren't about famine, they are like the scales held by Lady Justice outside the Supreme Court. The scales of Justice. Some are weighed in the balance and found wanting. Yikes!, it's a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Do no harm to the oil or the wine. “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius, and do not harm the oil and wine!”This is Jesus building His Temple one brick at a time. In 2 Chronicles 2, Solomon was preparing to build a temple for the Lord and paid Hiram the King of Tyre with wheat, barley, oil and wine. "I will give for your servants, the woodsmen who cut timber, 20,000 cors of crushed wheat, 20,000 cors of barley, 20,000 baths of wine, and 20,000 baths of oil.”The denarius was the silver coin of the Roman empire. From the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, it would seem that a denarius was the ordinary pay for a day's wages. "The wages of sin is death. "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.Seal three was the judgement of the dead. 457BC + 2300 - the zero year = 1844. At Your Service. EDIT: PS, I just worked a 12 hour day with a long drive home. I will be going to bed now =P and waking up at 3:30AM. =( So if there is a reply, I will get it tomorrow when I get home. For those that are not working, its Saturday! Before you do the things you want to do...do what God wants you to do. Go out and ask a neighbor to Church. Go to a few houses and tell people of Jesus. Give him the time in the day before you give it to yourself. It's been a hard days night, I should be sleeping like a log. Good night John boy. Should i try to do some more?, Twenty 5 or six to four. Six days you shall labor, and do all thy work..."For those that are not working, Give Him the His Time. Peaceful Sabbath. I recommend it. The Lord made the Rest, and i saw it was good.
|
|
|
Post by rt on Aug 31, 2018 21:38:24 GMT -6
Okay everyone, let's just all admit it- we all make assumptions when trying to put together the pieces of the prophetic puzzle, spending time here discussing these ideas is one of the most enjoyable things I do. I just truly love digging into God's word and sharpening iron with all of you. I also want to thank all who have taken the time to read and follow along and reply, whether we all agree or not, I am glad to be part of this group of believers who really want to dig and search the scriptures together. I have not found any other on line forum where I can share as I do here.
And who ever out there said a prayer for my head cold- thanks- seriously I feel better. Still congested, but better.
And if I ever say anything that rubs anyone the wrong way- I give you all permission to call me out on it. Sorry Gary if my using your own words did that, I was merely trying to make a point, more so in jest than in your face. I really do appreciate all the time you put into your replies to me.
God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Aug 31, 2018 21:47:20 GMT -6
to my beloved Gary, of whom I have the utmost respect and gratitude: Because of you, UNsealed exists and this forum is a voice for a fellowship of Christ-followers that can not be duplicated within a physical neighborhood church. Its been a month or so from beyond my year here. There has been so much gleaned and such a BOND with many brothers and sisters that can not equate to my local church.
It clearly is by His Design that this has come about. What is going to happen is already beginning: the refining of what we know or perceive as prophecy of end times, and what we, who are alive and are remaining are witnessing as the end comes about in real time.
Gary, you said this: Question: It is easier to defend a phrase that says "like a lion" so as to interpret it as not a real lion, but are there not things that the Lord speaks to us that are not actual physical, but require us to be "in the Spirit" with Him so as to gain wisdom? (sorry for all the double negatives)
Why the 24 and not just say Elders? Why just say creatures, but there is a distinct description of them. And, why not that there are two entities, one being of the Creation number and one being of the governing number, and two entities (heavenly witnesses) agreeing and singing as to the WITNESSING of Jesus' ascension? What if Chapter 5 is purely about John seeing God's Law of what is Blood Covenant and reminding the Churches of that? after all, he being a jew, was up against a lot of tradition, and the churches needed this revelation to remind then of the New Covenant. ANd he was instructed to write this and send it to the churches.... Within those churches, and the original 12 are a many jew of their day....they needed the validation from John of what Heaven had to say about Christ FULFILLING the Law...no?
and if John is post-rapture, why was only his spirit in heaven verse 4:1? would not it be a glorified body of himself? an immortal whole of himself? Is not the rapture a changing from the mortal to the immortal?
just my 2 cents..
and this you added above: Where in the Seals does it suggest the beginning of the Wrath? we get the 1st trumpet starting, but then are we still in just a Tribulation only because of what the trumpets usher in? I only see the Bowls as actual Wrath because they say, In them is the Wrath...
I feel a little anxious posting this because I am afraid it may have a negative tone...not my desire, Like you I wish we all were in a live round table discussion..
blessings, brother!
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Aug 31, 2018 21:55:40 GMT -6
@davewathcman, all I can say to this comment: is that it is still a compilation of man, and equally faulty by that definition. If wikipedia were the Inspiration of the Holy SPirit himself only, then ok...
We do know of well-intentioned Christ-followers building the data within wikipedia, yet I rest my case again...man, in this present flesh, is not infallible.
|
|
|
Post by rt on Aug 31, 2018 22:13:54 GMT -6
I was trying to find the post where I talked about the "us" vs. "them" dilemma- maybe I posted it on another site.
But either way it really doesn't make any difference because Jesus didn't just cleanse us He also cleansed the things in heaven.
So if the 24 elders and living creatures say that the Lamb redeemed them and they were the heavenly pattern for the earthly copy, then according to Hebrews they were, along with mankind redeemed. They were made to be part of His kingdom as well and serve within the heavenly holy of holies as priests to Him along with us. Remember all authority was subjected to Christ after His death and resurrection, this includes heavenly authorities. On earth only the high priest could enter the holy of holies, so I don't think it's too much of a stretch to assume that those who reside within the heavenly holy place might also be considered to be like high priests with Jesus being the "great High Priest" who they are all subject to. So to me either way- us or them- the heavenly was redeemed by the blood of Christ just as we are. So it really isn't proof that the 24 elders are redeemed men from earth.
|
|