Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[Diaste]

21 hours ago, iamlamad said:

It is a VISION! Do you really think the world will see a beast with 7 heads? I don't! The 7 heads REPRESENT things, just like the horses and riders represent things.

Yeah but the 7 headed beast had an interpretation to go with it so it's obvious that vision of the beast was a representative of actual characters. You miss the absence of an interpretation in Rev 6 concerning the seals. What you are seeing in Rev 6 are literal events. Is the rider of each horse a living being we are going to see? Not a chance. What we are going to see is the description of the condition the rider represents. The exception is the first seal rider. Notice the personal pronouns? This rider is a person that behaves as described; Rev 6 "2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer." You have said white must always represent the exact same thing, e.g., righteousness.  If white is associated with raiment in Rev then yes, it's righteousness. Here's an example. 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." See the description? Very different from, Rev 6 "2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer." The 1st seal rider is not righteous nor is this the gospel.

Look at the actual evidence: 

Revelation 3:4

Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.

Revelation 3:5

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Revelation 3:18

I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

Revelation 6:11

And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled

Revelation 7:9

After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Revelation 7:13

And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?

Revelation 7:14

And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Revelation 15:6

And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.

Revelation 19:8

And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.  As you can see 'white' equates to righteousness only in context. No such context exists in Rev 6:2. Meaning you and the following commentators are incorrect, again.

Ellicot's commentary:

Is not the vision the reflex of the hopes of early Christian thought? It is the symbol of Christian victory. It was thus their hopes saw Christ: though ascended He went forth in spiritual power conquering.

Pulpit commentary:

On a consideration of the whole of the visions attending the opening of the seals, it seems best to interpret this vision as a symbolic representation of the abstract idea of the Church as a victorious body.

Victorinus, following Matthew 24 in his exposition of the seals, sees in the first seal the Word of the Lord, which is like an arrow

Wordsworth, after St. Augustine, expounds the first seal as the advent of Christ and the Gospel, and the following ones as depicting subsequent troubles of the Church, which are specified.

Gill's commentary:

And I saw, and behold a white horse,.... Representing the ministration of the Gospel in the times of the apostles

Matthew Henry Commentary:
6:1-8 Christ, the Lamb, opens the first seal: observe what appeared. A rider on a white horse. By the going forth of this white horse, a time of peace, or the early progress of the Christian religion, seems to be intended; its going forth in purity, at the time when its heavenly Founder sent his apostles to teach all nations, adding, Lo! I am with you alway, even to the end of the world.

Barnes Notes: Barnes tells us these horses and riders are SYMBOLS. I agree.

As you can see, I am not alone in my thinking.

That does not make you or the people that agree with you correct.

 

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

a strict chronology of revelation does not reveal the truth. The only strict chronology I see concerning the end is in Matt 24. Revelation is not, NOT a strict chronology. If one adheres to such a strict chronology Revelation is thrown out of sync with many passages of the bible, Matt 24 being one. A strict chronology of revelation means the same events have to occur more than once and that is not what the book reveals.

In fact, Revelation follows Matthew 24. They agree in chronology. However, Revelation is much more detailed so it harder to see the chronology at times. For example, from chapter 11 onward, John had 6 different timelines all running simultaneously: there are the five mentions of the events that will begin at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, each with that last 3 1/2 years mentioned, but then there is John's narrative timeline added to those 5. Then at times John used parentheses with no marks: we have to find those by study.

In general, events from a given chapter will come after the events of a previous chapter and before events from a later chapter, just as in Matthew 24.  Anyway, I disagree: I think Revelation is very strict in chronology. If you disagree, I hope you will offer some proof.

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

The first seal is to represent the gospel sent out.

you wish. The 1st seal is the appearance of the beast in power after the deadly head wound is healed. Through God's permission and the power of Satan he then goes about to conquer. 

You are pulling the first seal out of its context. Back up to chapter 5 and you will see how John gives us the TIMING of the first seal: John saw the moment Jesus ascended into heaven and sent the Holy Spirit down. That ties the first seals to around 32 AD. Anyway, there is not one word about the first seal that even hints of evil.

 

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

The red horse and rider, the black horse and rider, and the pale horse and rider ride together. They are to represent the attempts of the devil to stop the advance of the gospel. It is very simple.

no. The second rider represents conditions on earth as the beast roams about either consolidating his power or, more likely, defending the pact he made with Israel against the nations opposed to the Jews building the temple. The third is economic control of the world by the beast edict; no buying or selling unless a person has the mark of the beast.  And the fourth is the slaughter of 100s of millions in the wars, persecution, famines, etc. I have no doubt this is an overview of all the death throughout the entire week.

Again, you are pulling these seals out of their context: 32 AD. John does not even introduce the beast until chapter 13! He does not even open the 70th week until the 7th seal. Let the context give you the timing.  Back up and understand what God is telling you in chapters 4 & 5. It shows TIMING and the movement of time.

First notice that in chapter 4, Jesus was NOT in the throne room and NOT at the right hand of the Father, when we have a dozen verses telling us that is where He should be.

Next, we have a search for one worthy to break the seals, that ended in failure - the very reason John wept. Yet, if we read ahead, we see that Jesus was found - later. So WHY was He not found in that first search? See, John is telling us a story.

Next, in chapter 4 we see that the Holy Spirit is there in the throne room, when Jesus said He would send Him down as soon as He ascended. So  for these three point, what time is it? There can be only one right answer: John is showing us a time before Christ rose from the dead.  Again TIMING.

But in chapter 5, SUDDENLY Jesus was found worthy. This tells us TIMING: Jesus just rose from the dead.  Then He ascended and John got to see that moment in this vision. Again TIMING: the very moment Jesus arrived and the Holy Spirit was sent down.

All this is to establish the TIMING of the first seals. The time is 32 AD. It is not about the Beast. It is about the infant church and the gospel.  Again I remind you, John does not get to the Day of the Lord until the 6th seal, and does not get to the 70th week until the 7th seal.  NOTHING before the 7th seal is about the Beast or false prophet.

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

the logic here is incorrect. The persecution of the elect, Jews and Christians, only begins at the midpoint of the week. There is no 7 year wait. For some it may be only one day. What? Did you think all the 70th week martyrs were killed on the first day of the 70th week? Now that's nonsense. Besides, the ones out of great tribulation are in heaven at the fifth seal, under the altar, meaning tribulation had already begun prior to the 7th seal.

Sorry, but this is illogical. OF COURSE all will not be killed on the first day, but my point was the very LONGEST anyone would have to wait would be 7 years - and they would KNOW that. You are jumping the gun again! John has not arrived at the 70th week in chapter 6. He is still in the church age. The first seals were broken in 32 AD when Jesus ascended. You cannot pull verses out of their context and hope to know what they mean. My point is, Stephen for example, would have no idea how long it would be before judgment would come. Neither any of those that Paul put to death. These are who John saw under the altar: church age martyrs. Any 70th week martyr would know it would all be over in 7 years (or less) when Jesus returns. They would have no reason or need to ask how long.  Besides, you are pulling this seal out of its context.

What will CAUSE the days of GT that Jesus spoke of? WHO will cause those days? Of course the Beast and False Prophet. They will cause an image to be erected and people will be forced to worship it or die, and will be forced to accept the mark. This is what will cause those days of GT Jesus spoke of. And WHERE in Revelation will the mark begin being enforced? Not until chapter 15! Yet you imagine these things are happening way back in chapter 6. This is what happens when you pull verses out of their context.

By the way, the first time John mentions "great tribulation" is in his dialog to one of the churches. The second place is in chapter 7 when John saw the raptured church in the throne room, before the 70th week even begins. I guess God figures it will be GT at the time of the rapture - just not the days of GT that Jesus spoke of, that will be greater than any other days ever.

59 minutes ago, Diaste said:

If indeed the rider of the 1st seal is the beast(it is)

In 32 AD? I hope you are kidding. If not, you are kidding yourself.

 

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

The first seal is HOLY WAR.

This is the rise of the beast as depicted in the imagery of the seal. The coming beast does not have any power or authority until the dragon empowers him.

OUT of context! The beast did not rise up in 32 AD. This is the CHURCH with the gospel: it DID begin in 32 AD.

 

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

The beast has risen, empowered, confirming the covenant, defending the rebuilding of the Temple and the land of Israel from the outraged Muslim hordes, therefore, peace taken from the earth; War.

Wrong again: NO BEAST in 32 AD. The first seal is the gospel. Seals 2-4 are to represent Satan's attempts to stop the advance of the gospel. When wars begin, missionaries go home.  War works with famine and pestilences to stop the church.

 

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

This is either widespread famine from the wars of the beast against Muslims or the economic control imposed by the edict of the beast;

You are 2000 years off in your timing.  Famines have been throughout the church age - many of them in Africa - the 1/4 of the earth the devil was limited to. 

 

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

This death of the 4th seal will begin in the Mideast and spread in a great many directions.

You have completely misunderstood what John wrote. The 1/4 is NOT a death toll! It is a geographical area that God LIMITED these three - war, famine, death through pestilence - to operate in: their theater of operation.

Matthew 24: ⁶ And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.  ⁷ For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.  ⁸ All these are the beginning of sorrows.

Notice what Jesus said about these events: THE END IS NOT YET. In other words, Jesus is not yet speaking of the end, but of the church age. Jesus and John in Revelation are in perfect agreement as to timing: these events are church age. Where did the black plague hit two different times, each time killing about 1/3 of the population? Of course in Europe: part of the 1/4 of the earth. Where have the famines been in our lifetime? Of course in Africa.

In the second century, 5 million dead in Europe of the Antonine plague. In the 5th or 6th century 40% of the population of Europe dead of the Justinian plague. More recently the AIDS epidemic has killed many millions in Africa.

If we leave these things in context, we see that this is church age events, proven by the agreement with Matthew 24.

The devil's purpose was to hold the gospel INSIDE this 1/4 of the earth. God allow the devil to work with war, famine and death but limited to where on the earth.  Of course he failed for there is hardly a place on the earth where the gospel is not found.

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

The words "to kill with sword, hunger, death and beast," are literal.  Agreed.  I say they are all Islamic

No, they are all church age events, HISTORY, not future. Jesus said, "the end is not yet." He was not speaking yet of the end. And when He did begin to speak of the end, He jumped right to the midpoint abomination.

[fixerupper]

Quote

It is a VISION! Do you really think the world will see a beast with 7 heads? I don't! The 7 heads REPRESENT things, just like the horses and riders represent things.

A beast with 7 heads and ten horns is just a bit different than a horse and rider. Horses and riders have been around for millenia.   You're trying to compare something obviously symbolic to something tangible and usually literal.  There are ways of determining whether a word is used literally or figuratively. But I've never know a pretribulationist to care much about good hermeneutics.  These riders are literal people, the horses are symbolic of swiftness, and 'white' in Rev.6:2 is symbolic of a false purity.   The riders are people, that's why we call them the four horseMEN.  Personal pronouns are used to identify them.
Most of the commentators you've quoted say Jesus Christ is the rider of the white horse in Revelation 6:2.  The reason why people have gotten away from saying Jesus Christ is the rider in Rev. 6:2 is because that rider wears A DIFFERENT CROWN THAN JESUS CHRIST DOES IN REV. 19.   SO LET ME RE-SPOON FEED THIS...

CROWN IN 6:2 is 'stephanos' a victors crown and signifies triumph and authority.  It's actually a "wreath or garland."  Similar to a turban which developed from crowns anyway.

The many CROWNS  Christ wears in Rev. 19:12  are "DIADEMS."  That represents 'universal dominion.'
Look at what Vines says about this...

Is never used as stephanos is, it is always the symbol of kingly or imperial dignity, and is translated "diadem" instead of "crown" in the RV...

This horseman goes "out conquering and to conquer."  This is two different tenses of the same verb nikao, "conquer," "subdue," "overcome," "prevail," "get the victory."

I'm not sure that the word SUBDUE is ever used to describe the gospel being spread.  One author said,
_________________________________________________________________________
"John is telling us that the horseman begins and continues to conquer, and he will certainly conquer or will ultimately conquer (see A.T. Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament on this verse). The implication is that his entire purpose is to conquer, to dominate, to subjugate the peoples of the earth. The white horse and its rider represent religious deception."

Overall, the white horse and its rider are vivid representations of a powerful, aggressive, victorious force running unrestrained over mankind. Like a knight in armor or a soldier in full dress uniform, the first horseman appears to the eye as glorious and noble, but its intent is to kill, destroy, and subdue its enemies. Its white façade is deceptive, concealing a deadly, unholy purpose."
___________________________________________________________________________
Let's see.  The word 'conque'r is used extensively in the Koran. The rider of the second seal has a large literal sword.  I'm convinced that the quote "conquering and to conquer" reflects Islam's conquest of domination by abomination, conquest of the world through demographics and terrorism.  This is the "STRUGGLE" OF HOLY WAR."  

This is the logo of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Islam often uses crossed swords as their logos.  You've heard Muslim's speak of "the sword of Allah."

                                                               CROSSED SWORDS SIGNIFY CONQUEST IN ISLAM. 

The Bow...

This is a strang thing this word TOXON.  The word is only used ONCE in the New Testament.  If the rider were said to be going into battle or hunting, we could assume this is a weapon even if no arrows are mentioned.  The bow in this passage may not be a weapon at all.  It actually should be translated as 'bough' which it is in some manuscripts.

 τόξον tóxon, tox'-on; from the base of G5088; a bow (apparently as the simplest fabric):—bow.

A bow, the weapon, is sometimes figurativly associated with evil, NOT THE GOSPEL!

So you have a lot working against you so far.  You refuse to admit there's a rider.  And you believe the opinion of others.  The only reason you're giving me for believing the first seal is the gospel is because other people believe it. And then you have the nerve to say by praying and meditating on it the holy spirit enlightens you into truth.  It's OK the read commentaries, but that's just anothers opinion.  You have to look at WHY they believe what they do.  I do my best to show people WHY I believe WHAT I believe. 

To say this Whitehorse and rider of the first seal is the gospel makes the four horsemen a message of 'incoherent continuity.'  Why would war, famine, and pestilence follow the gospel?  You're mentors believe the rider is Christ, that's you're holy spirit.  Why would Christ be the opening seal to a bunch of bad guys and bad stuff? 

Quote

As you can see, I am not alone in my thinking.

That's the problem.  You're letting them do your thinking for you.  

Most of those guys gave it their best shot.  I don't believe them on this issue.

The first seal is HOLY WAR."  There are only two possible candidates for rider of this horse...Muhammad or Bin Laden.
On one CNN special they said, "Osama bin laden has been crowned as the worldwide symbol of Holy War"!
 

Edited July 15, 2017 by fixerupper

[Diaste]

 

7 hours ago, fixerupper said:

The first seal is HOLY WAR."  There are only two possible candidates for rider of this horse...Muhammad or Bin Laden.
On one CNN special they said, "Osama bin laden has been crowned as the worldwide symbol of Holy War"!
 

A main identifier of the beast is Rev 17:11 ,"And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition." 

The 'seven' are, Rev 17:10, "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space."

There must be a line of kings,  Greek 935, basileus, a king, ruler, emperor, where the 8th basileus is from out of, Greek 1537, ek, from out of, the first seven. I have not seen where Bin Laden or Muhammad is described in such a way. But there is a man that has been described as such and meshes perfectly with the Islamic Iron Kingdom and the Islamic beast. This is what Turki al Bin-Ali says about Abu Bakr al Baghdadi as reported by Graeme Wood in New Republic;

"One of those scholars, the Bahraini cleric Turki al-Bin’ali, cites a saying attributed to Muhammad that predicts a total of twelve caliphs before the end of the world. Bin’ali considers only seven of the caliphs of history legitimate. That makes Baghdadi the eighth out of twelve—"

https://newrepublic.com/article/119259/isis-history-islamic-states-new-caliphate-syria-and-iraq

If Baghdadi is the 8th out of 12 then he is of the first 7. Baghdadi fits the description, "even he is the eighth, and is of the seven," in way no one else can. 

Based on lineage of Caliphs from Muhammad onward Bin Ali notes that Baghdadi has the qualifications to be a legitimate caliph.

"The word khalifa means “successor” (to Muhammad), and as such, a rightful caliph can demand the allegiance of all Muslims. But historically, an applicant for the job has had to fulfill a few conditions. He (always he) must be Muslim, fully grown, devout, sane, and physically whole. Because he is theoretically meant to lead Muslims in battle, missing limbs or a sickly disposition will automatically disqualify him. He must also hail from the Quraysh tribe of the Arabian peninsula, a requirement that turns out to matter a great deal in the case of the current caliph."

https://newrepublic.com/article/119259/isis-history-islamic-states-new-caliphate-syria-and-iraq

Why does this matter to Baghdadi? Because he claims to hail from the Quraysh tribe.

"...his Qurayshi lineage is beyond public dispute. "

https://newrepublic.com/article/119259/isis-history-islamic-states-new-caliphate-syria-and-iraq

Does it matter if Baghdadi is really from the Quraysh tribe? Or if Bin Ali claims only 7 caliphs to be legitimate and Baghdadi is also the 8th legitimate caliph does the Muslim world rush to the desert for bay'ah? No, it does not and they will not. But the 8th king is not going to rely on popular opinion or the bay'ah of the Muslim world to rise to power. Does the story by Mr. Wood lend credibility in the eyes of the world to Baghdadi's claim of  legitimate lineage and therefore the true ruler of the Caliphate? No. This is a biblical prophecy with a specific description given  almost 2000 years ago as a marker for identification. Now a personage is being described in exactly the same way as Rev 17:10 and we cannot brush it aside.

Since the beast is going to rise to power through the power of the dragon after the deadly head wound is healed the beast needs neither popular support nor world opinion. I have heard for years that the beast is a 'replacement' christ and that his rise and rule is going to mirror the path of Jesus like the evil twin. If this is true Baghdadi will be caught and tried in court, executed and rise from the dead just as Jesus did and just as Rev 13 says, "And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast."

This is going to be important to the Muslim world in ways we don't fully understand. His supporters will watch closely as if the legitimate caliph is discredited or dies they have to wait for another, his non-supporters are going to watch as closely to see this pretender trying to force his way into leadership get his just desserts and prove he was not the person to lead the Muslim world. They will all stand in awe after the execution and resurrection of the beast, as will a great deal of the rest of the world.

 

[Diaste]

9 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Sorry, but this is illogical. OF COURSE all will not be killed on the first day, but my point was the very LONGEST anyone would have to wait would be 7 years - and they would KNOW that. You are jumping the gun again! John has not arrived at the 70th week in chapter 6. He is still in the church age. The first seals were broken in 32 AD when Jesus ascended. You cannot pull verses out of their context and hope to know what they mean. My point is, Stephen for example, would have no idea how long it would be before judgment would come. Neither any of those that Paul put to death. These are who John saw under the altar: church age martyrs. Any 70th week martyr would know it would all be over in 7 years (or less) when Jesus returns. They would have no reason or need to ask how long.  Besides, you are pulling this seal out of its context.

Not sure your 32 AD claim holds any water. How is it possible for the seals to be opened before the vision is even given? John was not given the vision until around 90 AD. Rev 4:1 says, "Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter." Meaning every prophetic event and/or person is after the vision is given. The earliest any seal could be opened is post 90 AD. Do you even know what 'context' means?

What will CAUSE the days of GT that Jesus spoke of? WHO will cause those days? Of course the Beast and False Prophet. They will cause an image to be erected and people will be forced to worship it or die, and will be forced to accept the mark. This is what will cause those days of GT Jesus spoke of. And WHERE in Revelation will the mark begin being enforced? Not until chapter 15! Yet you imagine these things are happening way back in chapter 6. This is what happens when you pull verses out of their context.

You keep saying 'out of context' is that your Plan B when actual evidence is lacking to support your contention? Revelation is not strictly chronological. Parts of Revelation are chronological and even some successive chapters, but it is not chronological from Ch 1 through 22

By the way, the first time John mentions "great tribulation" is in his dialog to one of the churches. The second place is in chapter 7 when John saw the raptured church in the throne room, before the 70th week even begins. I guess God figures it will be GT at the time of the rapture - just not the days of GT that Jesus spoke of, that will be greater than any other days ever.

It's not hard to see why you can't discern the truth. None of Revelation is John's words he only wrote what he saw and that was by leave of the Great God and his son Jesus. What you mean to say is, "By the way, the first time JESUS mentions "great tribulation" IN REVELATION, is in his dialog to one of the churches." This means "great tribulation" as mentioned in Matt 24 and Rev 2. Same person, same 'great tribulation'.

In 32 AD? I hope you are kidding. If not, you are kidding yourself.

OUT of context! The beast did not rise up in 32 AD. This is the CHURCH with the gospel: it DID begin in 32 AD.

Wrong again: NO BEAST in 32 AD. The first seal is the gospel. Seals 2-4 are to represent Satan's attempts to stop the advance of the gospel. When wars begin, missionaries go home.  War works with famine and pestilences to stop the church.

You keep saying this. I understand you sincerely believe what you say, I see the great conviction, but that alone does not make it true. Prove it with fact and leave the rhetoric out of it.

You are 2000 years off in your timing.  Famines have been throughout the church age - many of them in Africa - the 1/4 of the earth the devil was limited to. 

You have completely misunderstood what John wrote. The 1/4 is NOT a death toll! It's not? I don't think that can be proven. In the Mideast there are around 300 million. In Pakistan and India there is almost 1.5 billion.  A fourth of the land area of the earth is 17 million sq miles, equivalent to the combined land areas of Asia and the Mideast. The population of Asia and the Mideast is around 4.5 billion.  This means more than half of the population of the earth lives in a quarter of the land area of earth. It's likely that 1/4 or more of the population will die in the 17 million sq mile land area ruled by the beast.

Notice what Jesus said about these events: THE END IS NOT YET. Define 'the end'.  What end?  In other words, Jesus is not yet speaking of the end, but of the church age. Jesus and John in Revelation are in perfect agreement as to timing: these events are church age. Where did the black plague hit two different times, each time killing about 1/3 of the population? Of course in Europe: part of the 1/4 of the earth. Where have the famines been in our lifetime? Of course in Africa.

And you make a huge mistake here. Jesus said, Matt 24, "6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places." And then goes on to define these events as, "8 All these are the beginning of sorrows." Not the church age as the church age could not be defined as "beginning of sorrows". Placing these events at the end of the age as the disciples asked, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" The CONTEXT is the end of the age and Jesus coming, not a 2000 year time period that has only been defined by error stricken mankind. That's the commentators you follow. Erroneous.

In the second century, 5 million dead in Europe of the Antonine plague. In the 5th or 6th century 40% of the population of Europe dead of the Justinian plague. More recently the AIDS epidemic has killed many millions in Africa.

 Not the end of the age. Famine and plague have been occurring since the beginning. this proves nothing.

If we leave these things in context, we see that this is church age events, proven by the agreement with Matthew 24.

Proven? It's rhetoric, not proof.

The devil's purpose was to hold the gospel INSIDE this 1/4 of the earth. God allow the devil to work with war, famine and death but limited to where on the earth. Are you off your rocker? War, famine and death have occurred and do occur in all countries of the earth. These plagues are not limited to any land area.  Of course he failed for there is hardly a place on the earth where the gospel is not found.

No, they are all church age events, HISTORY, not future. Jesus said, "the end is not yet." He was not speaking yet of the end. Of course he was! That's what the disciples asked about and that's what Jesus was talking about!  And when He did begin to speak of the end, He jumped right to the midpoint abomination.

You have to read all the words not just the ones you use to prove a point. The disciples asked a two pronged question. When will this happen, and what is your coming and the end of the world. These are related in time. Notice the use of "when" and "what". When is it coming and what does it look like. Since the disciples asked about the end, that's what they were concerned about, and Jesus answered with the events and signs of the end, not two millennia of events that had been occurring for millennia previous. 

 

[Diaste]

12 hours ago, iamlamad said:

In fact, Revelation follows Matthew 24. They agree in chronology. However, Revelation is much more detailed so it harder to see the chronology at times. For example, from chapter 11 onward, John had 6 different timelines all running simultaneously: there are the five mentions of the events that will begin at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, each with that last 3 1/2 years mentioned, but then there is John's narrative timeline added to those 5. Then at times John used parentheses with no marks: we have to find those by study.

In general, events from a given chapter will come after the events of a previous chapter and before events from a later chapter, just as in Matthew 24.  Anyway, I disagree: I think Revelation is very strict in chronology. If you disagree, I hope you will offer some proof.

Proof means nothing to you. You ignore anything that does not fit the training of your handlers. Plus you are unclear on your own beliefs as you engage in doublespeak. Do you have any idea what 'chronological' means? "relating to the establishment of dates and time sequences." Above you say there are "6 different timelines all running simultaneously".  That's concurrent, "existing, happening, or done at the same time." Then you say, "Revelation is very strict in chronology". This is not a minor point. It's two very different concepts. But you are right at the threshold of understanding. Revelation has a concurrent/consecutive layout. It's like a novel that guides different characters to the same point in time. One chapter defines the outline, then successive chapters tell the story of the characters and their march toward the climax. The chapters that tell the story of the characters are concurrent. The outline and the main character advance the timeline in consecutive order while the other characters are on the move simultaneously.

You are pulling the first seal out of its context. Back up to chapter 5 and you will see how John gives us the TIMING of the first seal: John saw the moment Jesus ascended into heaven and sent the Holy Spirit down. That ties the first seals to around 32 AD. Anyway, there is not one word about the first seal that even hints of evil.

Not possible as the 1st seal only comes 'hereafter' John ascended to heaven in 90 AD. How can the first seal be open 60 years before its even revealed to exist? Who cares if the first seal hints about evil or not? It's not the gospel. If it is, please post scripture that likens the gospel to a crown, a white horse, a bow and/or a conqueror. Scripture verse, not commentators or rhetoric.

Again, you are pulling these seals out of their context: 32 AD. John does not even introduce the beast until chapter 13! He does not even open the 70th week until the 7th seal. Let the context give you the timing.  Back up and understand what God is telling you in chapters 4 & 5. It shows TIMING and the movement of time.

Not convincing. Post some scripture that proves your point. Your words are meaningless. Give us the words of the Father, Jesus, and the Holy spirit that prove these contentions.

First notice that in chapter 4, Jesus was NOT in the throne room and NOT at the right hand of the Father, when we have a dozen verses telling us that is where He should be.

Dozens that tell us that is where Jesus should be? And you ignore all of them in favor of the logical fallacy of proof by lack of evidence?  There is no way you are a confessing believer.

Next, we have a search for one worthy to break the seals, that ended in failure - the very reason John wept. Yet, if we read ahead, we see that Jesus was found - later. So WHY was He not found in that first search? See, John is telling us a story.

You are telling a story. A pathetic story of deception and lies. There were not two searches. The angels didn't go around polling every man or holding a tournament. It was a symbolic proclamation as no man could ever be worthy.  Scripture does not say that the Lion of the tribe of Judah was searched out from the earth or any where else. Your adding things that are not there.

Next, in chapter 4 we see that the Holy Spirit is there in the throne room, when Jesus said He would send Him down as soon as He ascended. What? The holy spirit is a spirit not a lampstand. So  for these three point, what time is it? There can be only one right answer: John is showing us a time before Christ rose from the dead.  Again TIMING.

But in chapter 5, SUDDENLY Jesus was found worthy. This tells us TIMING: Jesus just rose from the dead.  Then He ascended and John got to see that moment in this vision. Again TIMING: the very moment Jesus arrived and the Holy Spirit was sent down. This is more made up garbage. Nothing in chapter 4 suggests what you are saying.

All this is to establish the TIMING of the first seals. The time is 32 AD. It is not about the Beast. It is about the infant church and the gospel.  Again I remind you, John does not get to the Day of the Lord until the 6th seal, and does not get to the 70th week until the 7th seal.  NOTHING before the 7th seal is about the Beast or false prophet.

So the midpoint and the day of the Lord occur before the 70th week begins? Both events are inside the 70th week.

 

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

Proof means nothing to you. You ignore anything that does not fit the training of your handlers. Plus you are unclear on your own beliefs as you engage in doublespeak. Do you have any idea what 'chronological' means? "relating to the establishment of dates and time sequences." Above you say there are "6 different timelines all running simultaneously".  That's concurrent, "existing, happening, or done at the same time." Then you say, "Revelation is very strict in chronology". This is not a minor point. It's two very different concepts. But you are right at the threshold of understanding. Revelation has a concurrent/consecutive layout. It's like a novel that guides different characters to the same point in time. One chapter defines the outline, then successive chapters tell the story of the characters and their march toward the climax. The chapters that tell the story of the characters are concurrent. The outline and the main character advance the timeline in consecutive order while the other characters are on the move simultaneously.

How in the world could anyone write of 5 different timelines at the same time? It would be impossible. Say for example someone was trying to keep up with world war 2, while battles were going on in the Pacific, in Germany, in Africa and other places. What would they do? Write one sentence for one battle, then another sentence for another battle, etc? OF COURSE NOT! No one could understand which battle was being written about. A reporter would write an entire passage or letter about ONE BATTLE, then another passage or letter about another battle, even though both were going on at the very same time.

As I said, it is impossible to write of several things happening at the same time and write them all simultaneously.

The city being trampled, 11:1-2 will be the first of the five events to begin. I believe this will happen because the man of sin with his Gentile (Muslim?) armies will enter Jerusalem. After all, he must GET THERE if he is to enter the temple there. It is also my belief that He arrives about 3 days before he will enter the temple and declare he is god. The city will be trampled for 42 months.

Next, John introduces the two witnesses. It is my believe they show up 3 1/2 days before the man of sin enters the temple (the exact midpoint of the week) and they show up then because the man of sin showed up. They will testify for 1260 days. These 1260 days will be the very same time as the 42 months of trampling.  (Verses 11:4 through 11:13 are written as a parenthesis while John shows us the last half of the week for these two witnesses. Make no mistake here: they will be killed 3 1/2 days before the end of the week.)

Next, John sounds the 7th trumpet, which will mark the exact midpoint. It will sound in heaven when the man of sin enters the temple and declares he is God. 

A second or two later, those in Judea will begin to flee - just as Jesus told them to - and will flee for 1260 days, while the city is being trampled and while the two witnesses are testifying.

Get the picture? John introduces these events in the order that they will happen. All five events that have this 3 1/2 year timing do not begin on the same day. 

The events of chapter 12, outside of the first 5 verses that are a parenthesis, happen AFTER the man of sin enters the temple and divides the week into two halves. The woman (those living in Judea) that flee will flee within a second or two of seeing the abomination. it makes sense then that John put that in chapter 12.

I believe that the man of sin will be revealed when he enters the temple and declares he is God. But John is busy writing chapter 12, so does not get to the start of chapter 13 until he covers those events that will happen only seconds after the midpoint.

In chapter 13, John introduces us to the man of sin turned Beast. The timing is till seconds or minutes after the midpoint. But then most of chapter 13 is written as a parenthesis with no bearing on chronology: John takes us part way down the last half of the week showing us what the Beast and False prophet will do.

In Chapter 14 the timing is still shortly after the midpoint.  God must warn people about the mark before the mark is established and enforced.

Finally in chapter 15 we see the martyrs of the 70th week show up in heaven. The days of great tribulation will not occur until AFTER chapter 14.

This is the way John wrote, and the way the vision was shown to John; events were written in the exact order that they will take place.

It is quite apparent you don't understand John's chronology. The trampling, the testifying, the fleeing, the supernatural feeding and protection, and the 42 months of authority are all happening at the same time, from chapters 13 on to chapter 16 where the week ends. But they are going on in the background. John only covers the starting point of each event. Therefore the book is very chronological.

Axiom on Revelation:

ANY theory that must rearrange John's God given chronology is immediately suspect and will be proven wrong.

I said, "there are "6 different timelines all running simultaneously""  I was correct. I also said, ""Revelation is very strict in chronology"" and that also is very correct. John only gives us the BEGINNING point of each timeline, with the exception of parenthesis for the two witnesses and for the Beast and false prophet.)  The beginning points of each of these 5 timelines is staggered and John gives them in the exact order they will happen.

Therefore, if you say something silly, like, "chapter 17 really happens in chapter 6" it will be proven wrong.

Edited July 15, 2017 by iamlamad

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

Not possible as the 1st seal only comes 'hereafter' John ascended to heaven in 90 AD. How can the first seal be open 60 years before its even revealed to exist? Who cares if the first seal hints about evil or not? It's not the gospel. If it is, please post scripture that likens the gospel to a crown, a white horse, a bow and/or a conqueror. Scripture verse, not commentators or rhetoric.

It is a VISION! Do you not understand that a vision can be past, present or future, or all three mixed up? God can do anything in a vision.

Is there ANYTHING after 4:2 that is "hereafter?" Certainly there is, so God and John obeyed that verse. God did not say ONLY things hereafter, but many people imagine that is what He said.  If God had showed John TWO EVENTS that were future, and then finished the book with recipes for manna, He would not have lied. Many people imagine that from 4:1 onward all is future, and some even ignore the fact that John saw this in the first century, and almost 2000 years have passed.

"How can the first seal be open 60 years before its even revealed to exist?"   Very simple: God is showing John what happened 60 years previous when Jesus ascended. Do you imagine this would be difficult for God? In Chapter 12, God showed John the birth of Christ and who King Herod attempted to murder him as a child. In other words, God was showing John HISTORY while right at the midpoint of the week in the narrative.

Who cares if the first seal hints about evil or not?  Now I see how you come to your false theories: you just make things up! You don't care what the Word actually says. You know what it means, even it the words written do not bear it out. Well, you have been found out. OF COURSE IT MATTER what the Word of God actually says! If there is no hint of evil, then THERE IS NO EVIL. In other words, the first seal cannot possibly be the Antichrist Beast. God would have colored him fiery red! WAKE UP! The theory one must form for the first seal MUST FIT THE WORDS GIVEN, else all one is doing is creating fiction. A theory MUST COME from what is written, else it is nonsense. It also must fit the CONTEXT. The context of the first seal is 32 AD. You cannot get around this for it is absolute truth. 
 

Anyone can pull the first seal out of its first century context and make it be anything - especially if they don't care what the words actually say.

"If it is, please post scripture that likens the gospel to a crown, a white horse, a bow and/or a conqueror. Scripture verse, not commentators or rhetoric."  It is SYMBOLIC! It does not say in bold letters "GOSPEL!" Have you mediated on this passage for weeks? Have you prayed in the Spirit for revelation knowledge?  Of course not! My guess is, you BYPASSED Acts 1 and 2 in your Christian walk, and have no idea HOW to pray in the Spirit. May I suggest you camp out on 1 Cor. 14 for a while?

Search through John's 18 mentions of the color white and see if you can find even one that hints of anything evil.

Search through every word of the description at the first seal, and see if you can find even a hint of anything evil. It is not there. White in this case is to represent righteousness.  Did you guess that the devil would just stand aside and allow the gospel to leave Jerusalem and enter Asia without a fight? OF COURSE there had to be conquering every place the gospel advanced to. Men died. Satan don't want the gospel in a area he holds. Did you ever read "Through Gates of Splendor" or "End of the Spear?" People DIE taking the gospel to new places.

[Diaste]

6 hours ago, iamlamad said:

It is a VISION! Do you not understand that a vision can be past, present or future, or all three mixed up? God can do anything in a vision.

Do you actually believe that? How much good would a vision of the past do? None. A vision of the present would be more helpful in some cases I suppose but the present disappears as soon as it arrives, we are continual time travelers and so even a vision that was received right now, for right now, would soon be a vision of the past. The only visions that are meaningful are the ones of the future as that's where we are all going, every nanosecond. The Revelation is not a vision in my mind, it's a series of real events pulled from the deep future and shown to John, using visions.

Is there ANYTHING after 4:2 that is "hereafter?" Certainly there is, so God and John obeyed that verse. God did not say ONLY things hereafter,  He certainly did. but many people imagine that is what He said.  If God had showed John TWO EVENTS that were future, and then finished the book with recipes for manna, ????    He would not have lied. Many people imagine that from 4:1 onward all is future, and some even ignore the fact that John saw this in the first century, and almost 2000 years have passed.

And all the events are still future from now beginning with Rev 4:2

"How can the first seal be open 60 years before its even revealed to exist?"   Very simple: God is showing John what happened 60 years previous when Jesus ascended. That's not a valid answer. Just repeating your firmly held belief does not shed light on the question. Do you imagine this would be difficult for God? In Chapter 12, God showed John the birth of Christ and who King Herod attempted to murder him as a child. In other words, God was showing John HISTORY while right at the midpoint of the week in the narrative.

Does this mean that the midpoint of the week occurred in the 1st century?

 

Who cares if the first seal hints about evil or not?  Now I see how you come to your false theories: you just make things up! You don't care what the Word actually says.  I don't care what  the word says? Since the text says nothing about evil, or the lack thereof, I can only go with what is written. You know what it means, Yep. It's the beast who rises at the first seal sometime in the near future, perhaps at the beginning of the next decade. even it the words written do not bear it out. I know what it means even if the text doesn't say it? No. That's for useless speculators, like commentators. Well, you have been found out. OF COURSE IT MATTER what the Word of God actually says! If there is no hint of evil, Don't you see the error of your thinking? The text does not say, "No evil." So you cannot conclude, "No evil." Absence of fact does not prove existence or non existence, no conclusion can be drawn.  then THERE IS NO EVIL. In other words, the first seal cannot possibly be the Antichrist Beast. God would have colored him fiery red! WAKE UP! The theory one must form for the first seal MUST FIT THE WORDS GIVEN, else all one is doing is creating fiction. A theory MUST COME from what is written, else it is nonsense. It also must fit the CONTEXT. The context of the first seal is 32 AD. Prove it by scripture verses. You cannot get around this for it is absolute truth. 

So you cannot post any scripture that likens the gospel to a crown? Or a bow? Or a white horse? Or a rider on a horse? You don't have to post an example of all of them, just one will do. Any one.
 

Anyone can pull the first seal out of its first century context and make it be anything - especially if they don't care what the words actually say.

"If it is, please post scripture that likens the gospel to a crown, a white horse, a bow and/or a conqueror. Scripture verse, not commentators or rhetoric."  It is SYMBOLIC! It does not say in bold letters "GOSPEL!" Not saying it has to. Surely there is a verse that says something like, "And the Gospel of Christ is like a crown to those who hear it."; or "The gospel is like a conqueror of the spirit."; or maybe, "Like a white horse the gospel liberates the heart of man.", that leads you to your conclusion. Something? Anything?

 

Have you mediated on this passage for weeks? Have you prayed in the Spirit for revelation knowledge?  Of course not! My guess is, you BYPASSED Acts 1 and 2 in your Christian walk, and have no idea HOW to pray in the Spirit. May I suggest you camp out on 1 Cor. 14 for a while?

Suggest anything you like.

Search through John's 18 mentions of the color white and see if you can find even one that hints of anything evil.

The same tired logical fallacy of proof of non existence by absence of fact. Very weak argument.

Search through every word of the description at the first seal, and see if you can find even a hint of anything evil.  And again. It is not there. White in this case is to represent righteousness.  White is just a color and as far as I can tell the color itself represents just a color. White linen, white robes, white raiment represent righteousness and there is biblical evidence for this.  Where is the evidence for a white horse representing righteousness? Did you guess that the devil would just stand aside and allow the gospel to leave Jerusalem and enter Asia without a fight? I don't know, I didn't guess Trump would be elected. Not a good guesser. OF COURSE there had to be conquering every place the gospel advanced to. Men died. Satan don't want the gospel in a area he holds. Did you ever read "Through Gates of Splendor" or "End of the Spear?" People DIE taking the gospel to new places. 

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by Diaste