Jump to content
IGNORED

Sequence-of-Events Analysis


Marcus O'Reillius

Recommended Posts

Guest Robert
12 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

(By the way, gentle reader, have you too ever wondered where everyone got their palm frond?  I mean, there are a great many palm fronds too!)

God raptures Hawaii? :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  30
  • Topic Count:  265
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  13,130
  • Content Per Day:  3.50
  • Reputation:   8,461
  • Days Won:  12
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/06/1947

On ‎28‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 11:10 PM, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Hi Marilyn,

Yes, when you get down to basics, we all agree that our Lord rules.
However, how we get to that point involves a lot of differing opinions, over which we argue incessantly.

It is strange to me how people latch onto a particular way of looking at things, and rarely, if ever, have a seen a person change their initial position!
My pastor is rooted in Post-Trib because that is what they taught at his seminary school.
Now, I have gone over my material with him because of his knowledge of the Kione Greek, and he's heard all my points, and we've talked about them at length - 
- and he has no argument which negates what I've presented to him - 
- Still, in the end, he says he's going to stick to his teachers' teachings and stay "last day," Post-Trib.

For most of the people who do post (many lurk and just read), I think they have too much emotional energy tied up in their eschatology.
They've invested so much time in arranging the chairs on the deck of the ship that they can stand no rearrangement.
When this happens, usually the discussion quickly turns into an argument; each side trying to score points and undo the other side.
Again,  I have never seen anyone change their position in the face of such combativeness.

Quite a few are one-verse-Charlies, and going on one simple part, make up the whole around, what in my opinion, is a flawed take on it.
- Like using Peter to say when Jesus comes the whole world melts to nothingness.
Then, any other argument or prophecy you bring to their table is summarily rejected because it does not fit with their set way of thinking.

On the whole, I avoid telling people I study eschatology because it is the realm of so many crackpot ideas.
All too many people have a 'this means that, and that means this' approach and they come up with the most bizarre scenarios.
This is an idle curiosity among many, and all kinds of conjecture is permitted in what I think is wild speculation, and that group indulges in all kinds of fantasy.

One group who stand out are those on a "mission from God" to wipe out heretical eschatology!
These people really have an axe to grind, and they rarely have anything edifying to contribute: its their way or the highway.
Sometimes, I let them get my goat, like WPM on another board...
There are one or two here like that, well, maybe not as bad as him.

All in all, I do like to see what people come up with.
It helps me to hone my approach, and I welcome constructive criticism.  
(Usually all I get is 'YOUR WRONG' response because I bump into their eschatology - and the argument turns adversarial.)
I like to see where we diverge so I can examine junctions in how we form our respective eschatologies.
Once I see where a person is coming from, it usually explains why there is a split in our conclusions.

Thanks for reading,
Mark

Hi Marcus,

I see you are busy with the fellas, but thought I`d still reply to your comments. Yes I agree it can be quite a mine field, & really challenging to keep the right attitude when discussing Eschatology. However I always factor in that our Lord said that the Holy Spirit will guide us into ALL truth. He has lead us thus far with truth & He will yet clarify this the last great truth. At the moment we are in the `tossed to & fro ` stage, but give a couple of years & we will have more clarity.

Now I see that your thoughts on events around the 70th week are sequential. I think you would also realise that God`s word has examples of what looks like a sequence is actually layering. In the future I would like to do my summary of that time period. Then we can compare & discuss that too.

Blessings, Marilyn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

4 hours ago, inchrist said:

I'm afraid there are no concidence in scripture.

Im not surprised you can order them in one outline, the only evidence you have which is purely based on assumptions, 6th seal and the multitude who come out the tribulation, though neither of your evidence expresses a literal rapture

The Great Multitude come out of the Great Tribulation: fact - not assumption.

The Sun/moon/star sign precedes both the gathering of the Elect and the arrival of the Great Multitude: fact.

Ah, you say it's not spelled out for you?  Didn't you just say there are no coincidences in Scripture?

 

I'll post some more from my chapter on putting prophecy in its sequence-of-events order with another account about the end-times tommorow.  Tonight, I'm in Portland, Oregon, and I'm goin out to meet my co-worker at the barbecue place nearby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  10
  • Topic Count:  97
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  5,039
  • Content Per Day:  1.47
  • Reputation:   2,541
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  11/06/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/01/1950

23 hours ago, inchrist said:
On 7/29/2016 at 0:21 PM, WilliamL said:

The sign most universally accepted as the sign of Christ is the cross. Any other sign would not be recognized by a majority of the world's people.

I would have to disagree with that...I believe the rainbow is the oldest universally sign accepted by christians 

Matt. 24: 30 Then  the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will wail/mourn...

A rainbow in the sky would not cause people to wail, because they would not associate it with Jesus Christ.

Christians are not going to wail no matter what the sign of Christ: they are going to rejoice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

15 hours ago, inchrist said:

Marcus it says out of the Great tribulation....not out of the entire tribulations since the church was formed.....opps

Negative Ghostrider.

Jesus defines the Great Tribulation as a specific and unique event, never having been done before and never to be done again afterward - which BEGINS at the midpoint abomination and ENDS with the sun/moon/star sign, and, I'll add from my study of Revelation 14; three Angels who complete the Gospel and warn the wicked of their impending doom so that "all" mourn.  (And that is "all" as in the Hebrew sense of that which is applicable, and for the most part, and not our technical 100% definition in our present time, culture, and language.) 

So the Great Tribulation is not the past persecutions the Church endured, and it will be more severe than the Holocaust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

On 7/30/2016 at 2:26 PM, inchrist said:

Isaiah 4:1 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by your name, to take away our reproach.

Here Isaiah describes “seven women” who are a metaphor for the “seven churches” which we see in Rev 2 &3. In Isaiah 4:1 these “seven women” are requesting to be “called by the name” of the bridegroom so that they will not be looked upon with reproach.

Another THIS MEANS THAT and THAT MEANS THIS interpretation made up of unrelated topics and connected only because there are the mentions of women in both, and of course, by the coincidence of number.  

Isa 3:18 In that day the Lord will take away the beauty of their anklets, headbands, crescent ornaments, 19 dangling earrings, bracelets, veils, 20 headdresses, ankle chains, sashes, perfume boxes, amulets, 21 finger rings, nose rings, 22 festal robes, outer tunics, cloaks, money purses, 23 hand mirrors, undergarments, turbans and veils.
24 Now it will come about that instead of sweet perfume there will be putrefaction;
Instead of a belt, a rope;
Instead of well- set hair, a plucked- out scalp;
Instead of fine clothes, a donning of sackcloth;
And branding instead of beauty.

25 Your men will fall by the sword
And your mighty ones in battle.

26 And her gates will lament and mourn,
And deserted she will sit on the ground.

Isa 4:1 For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, "We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!"

2 In that day the Branch of the Lord will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel. 3 It will come about that he who is left in Zion and remains in Jerusalem will be called holy—everyone who is recorded for life in Jerusalem.

Rather than be demonstrative of the seven Churches where he wants a 5-2 split, all seven women are in the same boat: depicted as ravaged by war, captivity, and want.

To me, this is more of a depiction of what it will be like for the Remnant Jews who stick it out in Jerusalem and elsewhere around the world.  Their men are gone, victims of God's Wrath in its many forms of desolation, and they too have suffered terribly.  It will be the Lord who takes all their finery and beauty away.

In that day: a declaration of "it will be."  There will be a day.  Not necessarily the same day.  Zechariah uses this exclamation in prophesying as well to state something will happen.  Isa 4:1 is then a conclusion to the poetic section immediately before it - Isaiah did not insert this chapter and verse to separate the two.  That was done centuries later, and a few centuries ago.

While the book of Isaiah overwhelmingly is not set in linear, chronological fashion - a 1-2 process might be a correct interpretation here.  After the devastation wrought by the desolations God has decree through His Wrath, there is an ingathering and encampment for the survivors, who probably fare little better than the people depicted here.  Zechariah 8:23 also references this type of action.  The Remnant Jews and the few remaining "Meek" who do survive the one 'seven' gather at Mount Zion under a (temporary) shelter - which is the fulfillment of the Sukkot, or the Festival of Tents.

However, inchrist's criticism here, like so much of what he puts out, is a non-sequitur, and a red herring.  It is the result of his own illogical connections devoid of specific language and context, but equated nonetheless in his own peculiar way of thinking.

I do not use Isaiah for the basic framework of building an eschatology because of its general lack of linear narrative, but he does provide essential verse and passages with which to flesh out the bone-work structure derived from the major works I cited before and have compiled here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

Another criticism which does not address the subject at hand - the sequencing of events; is from inchrist's own peculiar brand of thinking.

On 7/30/2016 at 2:26 PM, inchrist said:

Rev 3:10 I will also keep you from the hour of trial
Only the one has an open door as per Rev 3:7 & Mat 25.  Then you claim you dont associate the Philadelphia church as the the wise virgin?

The parable of the TEN virgins, split five and five is somehow changed by inchrist to five and two, and applied here.  I don't think this application of that parable is correct at all.

The parable of the ten virgins; five who are wise, and five who are foolish, certainly has an end-time application, but it demonstrates on both (or either as you like) a figurative and literal manner the necessity of keeping the faith (oil -  figurative) right up to the end and not failing (buying oil = taking the mark of the beast - literal).

Now as to Rev 3:10, here is a study I did:

 

Revelation 3:10’s Protection Clause for the Church

            One verse in the account of the Churches stands as a pivotal point in two different eschatological theories: Revelation 3:10.  This verse promises to “keep” the PhiladelphiaChurch “from the hour of trial” that is to come.  The Pre-Tribulation Rapture position uses this verse to show the Church is removed from the world before the Tribulation Period which is equated to the entire seven years of the seventieth ‘seven.’  Meanwhile the Post-Tribulation Rapture position considers this same verse as showing how the Church can considered to be protected through the same seven year period and so endure the events enumerated within the book of Revelation.  These of course are conflicting and mutually exclusive claims. 

REV 3:10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.

            To start the analysis, asking the five basic questions that were laid out in the premise, the first two questions have already been addressed.  The speaker is identified as like a Son of Man and ostensibly is Christ Jesus.  It is interesting that John, who had a personal relationship with Jesus, does not identify Him succinctly in that regard, but from the text, being the first and the last John leaves no other interpretation possible.  The audience is the Christian, who has an ear to ear what the Spirit says to the Churches.  Neither answer materially affects how the interpretation of the verse can be made.

            Next the context of verse 3:10 must be taken within the whole of chapters two and three.  The Church of Philadelphia is but one of seven parts of the whole Church.  To each Church there are words of admonishment and encouragement, and a future promise.  Of all the Churches, only the Church of Smyrna and Philadelphia can be said to be positive and conversely the Church of Sardis and Laodicea are largely negative.  But all the Churches have a future promise and those that overcome will come from all seven.  This verse then does not represent all the Church, but only one part of it.  All the other Churches ostensibly go through this hour of trial, and the Church of Smyrna will be tested, and will suffer persecution for ten days, figuratively speaking, a greater time than the hour of trial.  So to split out the Church of Philadelphia as representative of the whole is to selectively use a Bible verse to support a prior position rather than letting the Bible speak and fitting what it says into a systematic whole.

            Within the customs and the culture of the time, the use of hour is not to be taken literally, but as a subjective use of time, does indicate a shorter timeframe.  Hour also describes the last night and day of Jesus before the crucifixion in the Gospel accounts and as a figure of speech means for a time, but not necessarily an hour.  The fixation on time is a Western convention, and nothing within the first century culture would place such a restrictive interpretation as that, but rather this time will be short. 

            The word study has quite a bit that can be made theologically from the expression keep from.  Most of the commentaries stress the aspect of separateness found in concept from the word translated as from.  The only other place where these two words are used together is in John 17:15. It is also noteworthy that both the verse in question and the only other instances of these words together are penned by John in Greek.

JN 17:15My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.

            To put this into context with the overall sequence of events timeline, Satan has possession of the world and previously offered it to Jesus at the start of His ministry, but now Christ has invaded his domain.  Now at the end, Jesus is physically leaving the world, and prays not for a physical separation from the world for the apostles but a sense of protection against Satan who is in the world with them, indeed, he will soon be thrown out of Heaven after Jesus’ Ascension and be relegated to the earth only knowing his time is short.

ἐκ is used twice in this prayer of Jesus.  When ἐκ is used with take as it is with the first part, it does convey movement, but in the second case when used with protect; tereo ek is translated as “protect them from” and conveys no movement whatsoever.  That is the prayer of Jesus for His sheep.  The same word for keep in Revelation 3:10, tereo, is translated as protect and in this instance and ek is from the evil one, Satan. 

            The difficulty arises when ἐκ which means out from within is applied in a literal sense to the passage in Revelation 3:10 as the primary basis for the action which is described.  In one sense it can convey movement.  In another sense it can mean ‘protection from.’  The second sense is used in the Pre-Tribulation position espoused by Dr. Paul D. Feinberg when the verb and the preposition are used in context of the Church and seventieth ‘seven.’ His position is based in part on the example of John 17:15 where it is “understood as preservation in a position outside the preposition’s object.”—Three views on the Rapture p.67.  He states this condition describes a consequence of the Rapture.  Rather than being protected through the time of testing, this Church is protected away from that time.  Dr. Feinberg concludes that “Revelation 3:10 does not set the church within the hour.  Thus, its deliverance could be an exemption from the period of time.”—ibid p.70 (emphasis in original)

            Conversely, Dr. Douglas J. Moo makes the case for a Post-Tribulation Rapture by interpreting Revelation 3:10 by noting “spiritual preservation is clearly intended”—ibid p. 198 (emphasis in original).  He translates ek as out of and compares it to John 17:15 too but concludes with it as separation.  He argues against a physical removal, but shies away from stating this verse as a lynch pin for his position by stating it “neither offers a clear-cut evidence for or against a posttribulational Rapture.”—ibid p. 198

            As with the nuances of meaning that can be derived as Drs. Feinberg and Moo have shown, there are other ways in which this interplay of keep from can be thought to be true.  In a Historical context, where the far term sense is emphasized with the Churches describing various Church ages, the Philadelphia Church is kept out of the Tribulation Period as commonly referred, meaning the entire seventieth ‘seven,’ by having its existence end before the commencement of that time with the “covenant with many.”  This interpretation has the idea of ek as one of separation, which is allowable. 

In the other sense where all the Churches are part of a whole, emphasizing the unity of the Churches and the message to each radiating out, this Church is also separated, but in the sense that the use of whole world is not a complete domination, but describes the entire influence the Antichrist as being like Alexander who conquers all the earth, yet it is just a portion.  This idea of domination over the area of influence around Jerusalem yet not being completely world-wide is supported in part by Daniel and Revelation where Kings of the East and South battle the Antichrist.  So it could also be that the PhiladelphianChurch is not directly affected from the Antichrist because of a geographical separation.

All the previous interpretations of keep from lead to different interpretations that cannot be settled because they focus on the preposition and gloss over the actual action.  Conflicting views can infer it is either an 'exemption from' or 'protection during' which occurs by a single word ek.  However, while some aspect of the word's usage will certainly be true, it need not necessarily be either extreme is true.  Focusing on the primary preposition, ek or ex, leads to different suppositions because of the diversity in which this word is used.  It is translated as from, and out of, but also has a much broader range of meanings in translation.  In order to ascertain an interpretation how ek can be understood two parts must be considered: the verb and the object of the preposition.

First, the primary focus for an alternative view for Revelation 3:10 lies in the word for keep is tereo, (here in the future tense, active voice and indicative mood).  The basic definition of tereo relates to watching or viewing.  The idea of guarding is inherent with the idea of ‘watching’ and the word translated as protect and keep, projects that guarding connotation, especially in the English.  The translation of tereo may confer a ‘keeping’ or a ‘protecting’ but it is not an active defense, or even absolute. 

The basic meaning of the word is to “to keep in view,” “to note,” “to watch over”; it takes on such nuances as “to rule,” “to observe,” “to ward off,” “to guard,” “to keep,” and in a transferred sense “to see to,” “to apply oneself to,” “to defend oneself.”  The word occurs 39 times in the LXX in such senses as “to aim at,” “to keep watch,” “to pay attention,” “to watch over or for,” “to keep,” “to observe.”—TDNT p. 1174-5 

The unifying theme of tereo is to look after in the sense of guarding.  In this sense it both acts to protect and keep safe, but not by physical barriers, but by keeping the object in view.  In John 17:15 Jesus prays for God to ‘watch over’ His flock.  The apostles certainly were looked after, but as an absolute, the sense of protection afforded by tereo did not prevent their eventual martyrdom by Rome.  What ‘kept’ them was their faith which they did not give up so, their position as being God’s did not change.  In that sense they did not become part of the evil one.  That tereo would protect less than absolutely yet still maintain a position apart from Satan can be found theologically, as the Christian is not to fear him that can take his life, but Him that can take life and soul—MT 10:28.  The greater goal to attain is the salvation of the soul rather than the preservation of the body.

             Secondly, while the idea of keeping or protecting is not as strong as would be suggested by the use of the words in English, the preposition asks the question: from what?  Each rendition strives to define the clause as separation from distress or tribulation in the greater sense of the entire seven year period when the object of ek is the test.  The two words are not synonymous in the Greek.  Distress or tribulation derives from the word thlipsis.  The hour of trial, comes from the word peirasmos, means testing or temptation and is the same word as used in Galatians 4:14 and 1Timothy 6:9.—TDNT p.822  Trials have consequences, as in these two examples, both positive and negative; as a test it divides on a pass/fail basis.  While distress may lead to a situation involving a trial, the nature of the test is different than the conditions inducing it.  Whereas a prolonged suffering may be a test of patience, passing the test does nothing to the situation that spawned it. 

Within in the context of the use of the word hour, this hour is a pinnacle for the Christian just as Jesus’ hour was the very reason He came. (JN 12:27)  This would be the last test for the Christian and could come during a shortened time within the terrible time Jesus describes with the great distress, or tribulation.  The parallel between Christ and the Church comes from John 15:18 –the relationship between the world and Christians is defined by the shared hatred the world feels for Christ being transferred to the Church.  The test of the Church could be likened more to the final test given Jesus by Satan, and that is the matter of who will be worshipped.  This is different than the distress they will face, general hardships, hatred by the world, and even up to the forfeiture of their life.  As a command, worshipping God is foremost, and as a theme, the idolatrous rebellion of man stands as the greatest offence to God.  As a first prerequisite, this portion of the Church is typified by the exercise of faith as evidenced by their work in following God’s commands.  This follows Christ’s parable of the two sons in MT 21:28.  God can put the Church to the test, and in this sense, to watch over them out from within this test attests to the surety they will pass it.  To the individual, the lesson ought to be that God can save out of the greatest time of trouble when he does as God says.

            Looking at the promise afforded this Church during the hour of trial as compared to the other Churches, does not necessarily invoke a complete separation, or even the guarantee of physical safety.  Just as Jesus prayed for God to protect His flock from the evil one did not prevent the apostles from being persecuted and killed, so there is no assurance for the Church of Philadelphia of complete separation from the test.   The recipients of Jesus’ prayer faced death without giving up their faith though and in like fashion, this test of the object of one’s worship is not passed by saving one’s life in the physical world.  Putting keep from the hour of trial in context with the end times, because they have kept His command to endure patiently, (a command that will be issued in context with the seventieth ‘seven’) He will watch out (for) them.  Buttressed by His guardian aid, they will remain steadfast in that time of testing just like the apostles and will not give up their faith.  Here is the ultimate test as was spoken by Jesus in all four Gospels of the dichotomy whereby seeking to save your life will lose it and whoever loses his life (for Jesus) will save it.  Their resolute steadfastness results in an analogy; they will become ‘pillars’ of the temple, a figure of speech still in use in modern day language.  So this becomes a promise, not just to that first century church, but all those in those times especially as it pertains to the general level of distress that will be shown during the end times and specifically for the great distress; to do as God commands: to endure patiently.

The positions of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, the Post-Tribulation Rapture, the Historical model, and the circle model all can be afforded by some shade of interpretation of keep from as one of being separate.  However, this emphasizes the meaning of the English words of keep or protects which are much stronger in connotation than the idea of watching over which what is written in the Greek.  No matter how out from within or out of is used, the action promised is not total as is seen in the example of the Apostles and a similar wording in a prayer of Jesus’ and their eventual outcome.  But as a consequence of the exercise of faith, by enduring patiently, God’s promise is to watch over them out from within that testing, or in simpler English, God will watch out for them.  This could take several forms, a strengthening of the spirit, the granting of wisdom, or patience itself, but no matter the physical result, their ultimate destination is secure with God, He will not lose one of His own.

While the PhiladelphianChurch can be likened to the missionary Church of the nineteenth century, within the context of the two chapters, it is still one of seven types of Churches.  Other Churches or types of faith and their exercise are not similarly promised to escape this fate of testing, and the Church of Smyrna can even expect an extended period of persecution aside from this testing hour.  So if the Church of Philadelphia is not ‘kept from’ the hour of testing as the English meaning leads the reader to believe, but endures patiently and passes the test successfully with the help of God, then even this Church will be a part of this time.  Based on the meaning of the Greek verb tereo, the conclusion reached cannot support an absolute protection either by prior removal or even spiritual separation, but rather that this verse is a promise that God will watch out for those that endure patiently as He commands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

On 7/30/2016 at 2:35 PM, inchrist said:

7th trumpet in Rev we have a literal rapture/resurrection with the two witnesses being the first. No assumption

No, your assumption is that they are the first.

Rather, they are the last because they complete the number of fifth Seal martyrs and they come after the Rapture which happened on the previous Day of the Lord's sixth Seal - which in sequence fashion - comes before all the Wrath of God contained in the Scroll which goes forth with the Trumpets.

From Revelation and what I posted is this sequence which Jesus gives John.

  • Rev 6:12-13 - Sun/moon/star sign

  • Rev 6:14 - Scrolling of the sky

  • Rev 7:4-8 - “Mustering” the 144,000

  • Rev 7:9-17 - Great Multitude arrives in Heaven out of the Great Tribulation

  • Rev 8:1 - Scroll opened with breaking of seventh Seal

  • Rev 8:7 - First Trumpet fire and blood 1/3 of earth burned

  • Rev 8:8 - Second Trumpet 1/3 of sea to blood

  • Rev 8:10 - Third Trumpet 1/3 of water bitter

  • Rev 8:12 - Fourth Trumpet 1/3 of light struck

  • Rev 9:1-11 - Fifth Trumpet Abyss opened 5 months torment

  • Rev 9:13-21 - Sixth Trumpet WWIII - 1/3 of man killed

  • Rev 10:1-4/Rev 11:15 - Seventh Trumpet (no desolation mentioned)

  • Rev 11:19 - Earthquake

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

More rebuttal...

On 7/30/2016 at 2:35 PM, inchrist said:

The battle of Jericho on the 7th trumpet we have a prophetic rapture/resurrection with two spies and rahab. No assumption

Your first assumption is that the seven times they encircle Jericho on the seventh day equates to the seventh Trumpet of God's Wrath.  Seven is the number of completion, and in Jericho, it is God who gives the town to the Hebrews.

Your second assumption is that this is a archetype for the rapture.  Instead, Jesus gives us the examples of Noah and Lot, who were both delivered to safety before God's Wrath came.

God did not save the harlot, but Joshua honored the covenant the spies had made.  They could not whisk her out beforehand because of the walls.  Jericho is not a prophetic example of the end-times; it is a historical fact upon which we can build faith that God can overcome any obstacle man puts up against His people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,050
  • Content Per Day:  0.36
  • Reputation:   632
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/29/2016
  • Status:  Offline

Finally, something that is actually on topic!

On 7/30/2016 at 2:35 PM, inchrist said:

Now lets look at the 6th seal prewrath rapture:  Rolling of the sky.... no literal evidence of rapture/ resurrection - Assumption and speculation

Isaiah skies dissolving rolling back  of clouds....no prophetic evidence of rapture and resurrection - assumption and speculation.

The only literal fact here with the 6th seal and Isaiah is language used for judgement on a nation and this is undisputed evidence for a rapture?

An omission of an fact is not a commission of an error in the time and culture with which the Bible was written.  That is solely a facet of our technical, literal time and culture where we want the facts, just the facts, and all the facts, and to leave something out is a violation of the law.

Here is a new chart I just made up to compare the events given in the Olivet Discourse to the sixth Seal of Revelation, with some additional material showing the sequencing from Revelation chapter 14 and a verse from Paul from Thessalonians.

 

OLIVET DISCOURSE

 

REVELATION’s 6th SEAL

 

COMBINED

 

Mt 24:29 – sun/moon/star

 

Rev 6:12-13 sun/moon/star

 

Sun/moon/star event.

 

Mt 24:30 – Sign of the Son of Man

 

Rev 6:14 – scrolling of the sky

 

Jesus’ Parousia equating the two: Sign = Scrolling sky.

 

No mention – not germane to the Church at this point.

 

Rev 7:1-8 – the 144,000

 

Mustering the 144,000 happens before coming on the clouds and the Harvest in Rev ch 14.

 

Mt 24:30 – coming on the clouds

 

No mention in the sixth Seal. However - (Rev 14:15 – on the clouds before the “Harvest”) + (1Th 3:13 comes after the Resurrection of the Dead in Christ.)

 

Coming on the clouds with the resurrected Dead in Christ = all those in the Book from Sheol.

 

Mt 24:31 – gathering the Elect

 

No mention in the sixth Seal.
However, this is the Harvest of Rev 14:16

 

The Rapture.

 

Nothing else sequenced – the Church’s role in the world ceases.

 

Rev 7:9:17 – the Great Mulitude

 

The delivery of the Dead in Christ and the gathering of the remaining Elect.

It is not speculation.

The two accounts sync at the sun/moon/star event.
What follows can be logically blended - and this is buttressed, or confirmed, by additional linear narrative in the detailed, parallel account of the one 'seven' found in Revelation chapters 13-16 (inclusive).

So the arrival of the Great Multitude, absent during John's reporting of all he sees in the Temple of God (with its altar and throne - mercy seat) in chapters 4 and 5, is the natural result of the Harvest of Revelation chapter 14 and the gathering of the Elect who are still alive and remain from 1Th 4:17, who are preceded by the calling of the Dead in Christ (John 5:25) with the "Last Trumpet" of 1Co 15:51.

Now I would like to make an announcement: I have found an error in my sequence!
This is great!
This is why I do this, showing my work and explaining it.

I have put the Dead in Christ after the Coming on the Clouds.
As 1Th 3:13 - which is an observer true verse - and 1Th 4:17 sequence: when Jesus comes on the clouds, He already HAS resurrected the Dead in Christ.

I am going to have to change some word documents (I have this paper on three different ones) to reflect the correct sequence, which will have the Day of the Lord events look like this:

  • Sun/moon/star event Day of the LORD
    • Scrolling of the sky = sign of the Son of Man
    • Jesus touches down on Mount Zion
    • Mustering the 144,000 assembled on Mount Zion
    • 3 Angels fulfill the Great Commission / Warn the wicked
    • Martyr's deeds will be remembered (Two Witnesses left behind)
      • Last Trumpet call
      • Dead in Christ resurrected
    • Son of Man coming on the clouds with those Saints
    • Deliverance = Harvest Redemption / Gathering Elect from the clouds
      • Those who are alive and are left gathered up
    • Great Multitude arrives in Heaven out of the Great Tribulation
    • Books / Scroll opened with breaking of seventh Seal
    • First Trumpet fire and blood – 1/3rd of earth burned
      • Avenging Angels – supplying Blood and managing the Fire

Before Jesus comes on the clouds with the Saints, by necessity, He will have to have resurrected all those in the Book who dwell in Paradise as per John 5:25.

I will try to edit what I already have produced here to reflect that if I can.  If not, I will include this correction in any subsequent presentation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...