Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Somewhere in my recent studies I ran across this point of interest: 

The phrase "the Day of the Lord " can be grammatically shortened to simply "Day of Lord", leaving out the twice usage of the preposition "the".   During that time (of study)  I ran across Rev 1:10 in the ISV which used the phrase "Day of the Lord" instead of "the Lord's day".  This got me to thinking.  What i found out (something that i knew but had forgotten) was the usage of the phrase "Lord's Day" is used only that one time in Rev 1:10.  But could it possibly mean the Day of the Lord? 

My brief internet research concluded that it was hermeneutically "unlikely" to mean Day of the Lord.   But it was by no means conclusive.   But there was also considerable agreement that it was probably NOT referring to the Jewish or Christian sabbatical day of worship.   The problem is,  those in that group were hesitant to use it as "Day of the Lord ", and had little alternatives. 

Further research shows that similar phrasing [Day of the Lord]  is found in Didache 14:1, but was believed to be in reference to the Eucharist,  the breaking of bread.   As most of everyone here probably knows,  the communion service was instituted, the night before our Lord was betrayed,  in remembrance of his death during the time of Passover.  Going to Leviticus23:

*[[Lev 23:5]] KJV* In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover.

It is the Lord's day.  Do you see where I am going?   Passover and the feast of unleavened bread was instituted in remembrance of the Lord delivering Israel out of Egypt.   It is "the Lord's Passover".  A time of deliverance.   

Is there any scriptural reason not to include all of the 7 seals,  and beyond,  as being part of the "Day of the Lord "?

In the introductory verses of Rev 1, we find that John is told to write everything that you have seen

*[[Rev 1:19]] KJV* Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

The Greek word translated as "seen" is G1492, eido.  Here is where it starts to get interesting.   Rev 1:19 seems to break the book of Revelation into two sections:  the "things which are", and things "which shall be hereafter".  Now notice this: 

*[[Rev 4:1]] KJV* After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things WHICH MUST  BE  HEREAFTER .

From this point on,  we see this as things which take place "hereafter".  All of us here have come to recognize this to be the pretrib benchmark,  and do not hold to that position (anymore).  But it is a significant point in this book.   It is the point of hereafter.   Which means,  prior to this point,  belongs to the other group... The things which are, namely chapters 2 and 3 [chapter1 is the intro].

The word eido, G1492, is translated in chapters 2 and 3 almost exclusively as "know".  What seems to be conveyed is that what John reports what he saw in those 2 chapters,  is a non - visual "seeing",  maybe,  as intuitively.  And from chapter 4 on,  "eido" is translated, again with high predominance as,  "behold", "saw(est)", and "looked".  Thus,  something that he saw visibly with his eyes.   I find that very fascinating.   The "things which are",   are the things that he "knows", whereas the "things which shall be hereafter" are the things that he visibly "seen with goods eyes".  Any way,  sorry to get so sidetracked.   I realize that if you view some of the seals as having already been opened,  you are probably not going to see my original point about "the Day of the Lord ".  Is their anything to preclude the notion that the main thrust of the book is the day of the Lord? 

Blessings

The PuP 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×