Post by boraddict on Jul 12, 2021 1:31:09 GMT -6
My work in Jeremiah has taken me back into the Book of Revelation at Verses 14:4-5 and it is a never ending battle of examination and diagnosis. The LDS would just say "follow the prophet"; their false prophet. In fact, they defer all interpretation of scripture to their false prophet and use the phraseology that they accept the Bible "in so far as it is interpreted correctly"; meaning, interpreted by their false prophet.
Like, they can not enter into the realm of scripture analysis but believe that they are absolutely right. Like, if I speak of the Book of Revelation then they think that I am "off the deep end" and they are so comforted that they "follow the prophet." On the flip side, I am free to consider all possibilities when it comes to understanding scripture and they are not; but are limited by their church leaders. The chapter that references this type of situation is Isa. 28; that we must remain teachable (Isa. 28:9).
So I have been forced to consider the word "virgins" in Rev. 14:4. Oh, I forgot to mention that the LDS avoid the BofR like a plague. However, I always consider scripture analysis in light of what other churches might say about the verses in question and try to defend against those possible arguments. Like the Jehovah Witnesses are somewhat elementary and apply a literal interpretation to the BofR, but the LDS defer it to the false prophet. And, they turn their nose up when they see me coming and that really offends me because they are so condescending to me that I am offended at the sight of them; in my neighborhood that is. My daughter has one more year of high school and moving might be the right answer for my family. But for now she is like all A's since the 9th grade and I do not want to disrupt what she has going. Sorry about the rant.
However, the word "virgins" in Rev. 14:4 appears (?) to be literal. Here is the verse in it's chiasmus form:
1) "It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins.
2) It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes.
3) These have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb."
How can anyone be defiled with women if they are in a marriage. That is, marriage is not defiling but other types of physical relations are; like: adultery, fornication, homosexuality and so forth. So the word "defiled" in this verse may be an incorrect interpretation of the original text.
Secondly, they are virgins and this implies that these are teenagers and that is why I was on the defense from the LDS argument; that these would be teenage boy missionaries that they have now to the tune of 75,000, and could easily bump up to 144,000. My heart sank at the thought of it.
Third is my reliance upon the chiasmus that has in it's parallel (1 & 3) that the word "virgins" aligns with "first fruits" and this is the correct analysis in my opinion. That first fruits are the first people to be taken in the rapture. These first fruits are not defiled with sexual sin but are redeemed from mankind and are now, having been redeemed, sinless. That is, they have been cleansed in the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5, 5:9. Further evidence is that these kings were, as in past tense, committing fornication with Babylon (Rev. 17:2, 18:3).
That is, the kings of Rev. 17:2 and Rev. 18:3 that had been in fornication with Babylon were then cleansed via the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5 and 5:9 such that they are now clean and undefiled at Rev. 14:4. And not only that but they being the first fruits and virgins in the marriage. That is, they having been fornicating with Babylon and cleansed are now the virgins in the marriage as the first fruits.
As you can see, the word "virgins" that appears to be literal in Verse 14:4 is in fact metaphorical. I'll tell you what really threw me off what the word "guile" in the next verse Rev. 14:5. I thought, how can these two words be different; one being metaphorical and the other literal. However, the connection between the two verses, 4 and 5, is just that; Verse 5 is the literal application of Verse 4. Better stated; Verse 4 that is metaphorical is explained in Verse 5 that is literal. Please notice that the point of Verse 4 in Verse 5 is that the 144,000 are without fault. And if you ask how a sinner can be without fault then the only answer can be that they have been cleansed via the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5. In other words, their unclean mouths (v. 14:5) were cleaned as referenced in Isa. 6:5-7 wherein the sin of a foul mouth is purged via the atonement of Jesus Christ.
Thus, the undefiled virgins in Verse 4 that are redeemed as the first fruits have had their mouths cleansed and are now without fault (v. 5).
I hope you like the above analysis.
Like, they can not enter into the realm of scripture analysis but believe that they are absolutely right. Like, if I speak of the Book of Revelation then they think that I am "off the deep end" and they are so comforted that they "follow the prophet." On the flip side, I am free to consider all possibilities when it comes to understanding scripture and they are not; but are limited by their church leaders. The chapter that references this type of situation is Isa. 28; that we must remain teachable (Isa. 28:9).
So I have been forced to consider the word "virgins" in Rev. 14:4. Oh, I forgot to mention that the LDS avoid the BofR like a plague. However, I always consider scripture analysis in light of what other churches might say about the verses in question and try to defend against those possible arguments. Like the Jehovah Witnesses are somewhat elementary and apply a literal interpretation to the BofR, but the LDS defer it to the false prophet. And, they turn their nose up when they see me coming and that really offends me because they are so condescending to me that I am offended at the sight of them; in my neighborhood that is. My daughter has one more year of high school and moving might be the right answer for my family. But for now she is like all A's since the 9th grade and I do not want to disrupt what she has going. Sorry about the rant.
However, the word "virgins" in Rev. 14:4 appears (?) to be literal. Here is the verse in it's chiasmus form:
1) "It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins.
2) It is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes.
3) These have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb."
How can anyone be defiled with women if they are in a marriage. That is, marriage is not defiling but other types of physical relations are; like: adultery, fornication, homosexuality and so forth. So the word "defiled" in this verse may be an incorrect interpretation of the original text.
Secondly, they are virgins and this implies that these are teenagers and that is why I was on the defense from the LDS argument; that these would be teenage boy missionaries that they have now to the tune of 75,000, and could easily bump up to 144,000. My heart sank at the thought of it.
Third is my reliance upon the chiasmus that has in it's parallel (1 & 3) that the word "virgins" aligns with "first fruits" and this is the correct analysis in my opinion. That first fruits are the first people to be taken in the rapture. These first fruits are not defiled with sexual sin but are redeemed from mankind and are now, having been redeemed, sinless. That is, they have been cleansed in the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5, 5:9. Further evidence is that these kings were, as in past tense, committing fornication with Babylon (Rev. 17:2, 18:3).
That is, the kings of Rev. 17:2 and Rev. 18:3 that had been in fornication with Babylon were then cleansed via the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5 and 5:9 such that they are now clean and undefiled at Rev. 14:4. And not only that but they being the first fruits and virgins in the marriage. That is, they having been fornicating with Babylon and cleansed are now the virgins in the marriage as the first fruits.
As you can see, the word "virgins" that appears to be literal in Verse 14:4 is in fact metaphorical. I'll tell you what really threw me off what the word "guile" in the next verse Rev. 14:5. I thought, how can these two words be different; one being metaphorical and the other literal. However, the connection between the two verses, 4 and 5, is just that; Verse 5 is the literal application of Verse 4. Better stated; Verse 4 that is metaphorical is explained in Verse 5 that is literal. Please notice that the point of Verse 4 in Verse 5 is that the 144,000 are without fault. And if you ask how a sinner can be without fault then the only answer can be that they have been cleansed via the blood of Jesus as stated in Rev. 1:5. In other words, their unclean mouths (v. 14:5) were cleaned as referenced in Isa. 6:5-7 wherein the sin of a foul mouth is purged via the atonement of Jesus Christ.
Thus, the undefiled virgins in Verse 4 that are redeemed as the first fruits have had their mouths cleansed and are now without fault (v. 5).
I hope you like the above analysis.
