Will pregnancy and toddlers/children vanish when Rapture happens ?

[Diaste]

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

The first seal. The first seal introduces the Antichrist (Revelation 6:1–2). WRONG! You are pulling the first seal out of its first century context. 

Notice first that John watched as "no man was found" during this search for one worthy.  If we read ahead, we find that Jesus was found in another search after time had passed. The question we must ask then is why "no man (including Jesus) was found in the first search?  This takes a mind that has wisdom:  WHY was there a time when Jesus was NOT worthy to take the book and open the seals? This is what John is telling us: there WAS a time when NO MAN (on earth, in heaven or in hell)  was worthy  to take the book and open the seals. The answer is simple: it shows TIMING: at the first search, Jesus was still under the earth (He was there for three days and nights). In other words, He had not yet risen from the dead. Then, after TIME PASSED, and another search was made, Jesus was found. This shows us TIMING: Jesus had just risen from the dead. AGain, God is showing us TIMING. 

Hmm...So it's 95 AD but it's 33 AD? Jesus was worthy in 33 AD but not in 95 AD. Jesus dies and is raised from the dead in 33 AD, but still dead and unworthy in 95 AD?  John is shown in vision in 95 AD, but it's still 33 AD? Sure you got a handle on this?

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

This is the CONTEXT of the first seal. It shows us TIMING: around 32 AD. Therefore, ANY theory of the first seal must fit this timing. Yours obviously does not.

John was exiled to Patmos by Diocletian circa 90 AD or so. You expect us to believe it's 95 AD on earth but 33 AD in heaven? Do you really believe that?

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

The scroll’s fifth seal reveals those who will be martyred for their faith in Christ during the tribulation  Again you are 2000 years off. John is at the beginning of the church age, you are 2000 years later. Stop and think for a moment: any martyr of the 70th week would KNOW they have only to wait out the week. On the other hand, take Stephen: killed at the beginning of the church age: he would have had NO IDEA how long it would be before judgment would come. That is why they asked. The church age it seems will be around 2000 years long. And martyrs are STILL BEING ADDED. (John has not yet arrived at the 70th week in his narrative.) Judgment is not going to come until the full number of church age martyrs is killed. 

The sixth seal.   Here we are both thinking future:  The 6th seal will be the start of judgment and the start of the Day of the Lord. But the rapture of the church will come a moment before the 6th seal. This great earthquake will be Paul's "sudden destruction." The earthquake will be caused by the dead in Christ rising. Those who are alive and are in Christ may well feel the ground begin to shake as they are caught up.

After the opening of the sixth of the seven seals is an interlude in the book of Revelation. John describes the 144,000 Jews who will be protected during the tribulation (Revelation 7:1–8)  How astute of you! You have proven that the "tribulation" is FUTURE not past (as in the first seals). Good job!  Suppose you are watching a play with several "acts" and curtains that close between acts: what happens behind the curtains after it closes? They are rearranging the set to fit the next act.  This is exactly what John is doing in chapter 7. You see, the 7th seal officially starts the 70th week. In the mind of God, TWO EVENTS must happen before the 7th seal can start the 70th week: the church MUST BE seen in heaven, and the 144,000 MUST be sealed for their protection. Once God accomplishes these two things, then the 70th week can begin. And it will - with the 7th seal opening. 

The judgments that lead up to the close of the tribulation are now visible in the scroll  How nice of you to mention the scroll. It plays a HUGE part of John's narrative. This scroll was so important, God wanted to introduce it to John in the vision. But God wanted to start while the book (scroll) was still in the hand of the Father. Therefore God had to show the readers that He was backing up in time - so the readers would recognize that Jesus took this book as soon as He ascended. To accomplish this, God showed John (In the vision) a throne room with Jesus missing, a thone room while the Holy Spirit was still there, and a search for one worthy to take the book that ended in failure. Then God showed John the passing of time when Jesus was found worthy to take the book, and then as more time passed, Jesus ascending to the throne room and sending the Holy Spirit down.  

I am convinced that the contents of the book (what was written INSIDE) is the 70th week of Daniel. The scroll or book is opened as soon as the 7th and final seal is opened, so the trumpet judgements are the first thing to be read when the book  is opened. 

 

 

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

he rides a white horse, which speaks of peace  Since you missed the context and was 2000 years off on what the first seal represents, every other point will be wrong. John used the color white 17 times in Revelation, and 16 times NOT for peace but for righteousness. How could you are ANYONE think that John would use white 16 times for righteousness and once for something evil?

The word 'white' is an adjective. It carries no meaning other than a descriptor of a noun. No object, we have nothing. It is used to describe a noun such as flower, leprosy, snow, etc. The 17 times it is used in Rev it's describing wool, snow, a stone, attire, a throne, a cloud and thrice white is the adjective describing a horse.  I'll cite the relevant passages:

Revelation 1:14

The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire.

Revelation 2:17

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to the one who receives it.

Revelation 3:4

Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy.

Revelation 3:5

The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels.

Revelation 3:18

I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.

Revelation 4:4

Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads.

Revelation 6:2

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

Revelation 6:11

Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been.

Revelation 7:9

After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

Revelation 7:13

Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”

Revelation 7:14

I answered, “Sir, you know.” And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Revelation 14:14

 I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand.

Revelation 19:11

 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war.

Revelation 19:14

The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean.

Revelation 20:11

Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them.

It looks like two times white is directly associated with righteousness; "they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.", and "They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy." The other 7 times white attire is described we only assume it's associated with righteousness as the text is only unequivocal in Rev 3:4 and 7:14. But I'll give it to you that any white attire seen in Revelation is symbolic of purity of the wearer. 

That leaves a stone, hair, wool, snow, throne, horses and a cloud also described as white. I have not seen where any of the aforementioned are symbolic of righteousness. This is, "It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright [and] clean; for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints." Here the scripture says fine linen is symbolic of righteousness. It's not described as white. Mostly we assume it's white but we don't know that. White in Rev is 'leukos'. In the above from Rev 19:7 it's 'lampros' which is shining, magnificent, bright, splendid. Literally the only time we see the righteousness of the saints described it's shining, dazzling, stunning attire, not described as white but as brilliant light.

But again, I'll give it to you that wearing white clothes, any time it's mentioned, is symbolic of righteousness for the wearer. I believe that as well. Since the symbolism marking the righteousness of the saints is very specific one should not assume every mention of the color white is symbolic of the same. I don't see where clouds, or hair, or a throne, or a stone, speaks to righteousness of the saints.

But we have horses. Three times horses are mentioned as white. A great commander and his army are mounted on white steeds riding to battle. A conquering army is on the way, all astride white horses. This is the example we can relate to Rev 6:2.  A commander astride a white horse. Since the image is one of a conquering army riding to battle in Rev 19 then in Rev 6 this is also a commander on a white horse and not the Gospel. "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." 

If you could post chapter and verse likening the Gospel with a horse, rider, arrows and with a conquering bent, I would appreciate that.

 

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

The second seal. When the Lamb opens the second seal, great warfare breaks out on the earth  You are not far off here in meaning, (just 2000 years off in timing) but this warfare is LIMITED to one fourth of the earth: that fourth centered on Jerusalem where the gospel began. And it is for the duration of the church age: TWO world wars have started in this one fourth of the earth, and a third is sure to begin soon. I found a list once of all the wars in Europe iin the first 1000 years (AD 1 to AD 1000) and discovered there was hardly any period of time without a war going on somewhere.  There were also MUCH waring going on in Africa between tribes - also in that one fourth of the earth. 

The third seal. The breaking of the third of the seven seals causes famine  Again you are right on here, except 2000 years off. Famines have been rampant in Africa for centuries.  Even Europe has had famines. 

The result of this fourth seal is that one fourth of the earth’s population are killed “by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.”  Sorry, but you have TOTALLY missed what John wrote here. I suggest you read this over and over and over with no preconceptions. John is not telling us how many people are killed! He is telling us that these three, the Red horse and rider, the Black horse and rider, and the Pale horse and rider are LIMITED in their theater of operation to one fourth of the earth.  We don't know how many were killed or died due to war and famine and pestilence. 

Where did the black plague hit twice - killing about one third of the people each time? Europe! Remember, "ashes ashes we all fall down." Where has the Aids epidemic struck with so many dying? Africa! Again, in that one fourth these riders are allowed to operate.  Notice also that the first horse and rider are NOT INCLUDED in this group that is limited to one fourth. 

Your conclusions simply are not based in reality. Seal 2 is taking peace from the earth. It's not a limited definition such as war. Since there has never been peace on the earth since the Fall this is something very different.

Seal 3 does not cause famine. It's economic control based on scarcity. There has to be a cause for such world wide scarcity. As far as I know even world wars did not cause world wide scarcity. The US was lifted out of a severe depression based on WWII. Again this control based on scarcity has a very different cause.

The 4th seal doesn't seem to have any bearing on the previous 2 and I don't see the same conclusion here. It's just as possible that death and hades commands 1/4 of the earth. This seal also kills with the beasts of the earth. That's not limiting the control to a region. It could, but since the other seals are world wide I see this as more as commandeering 1/4 of the earth as a force of death. Interestingly the population of adherents to the Muslim faith is just about 1/4 of the population of earth. 

But if your conclusions are correct concerning the land mass idea then is the 5th seal also limited regionally? I bet it isn't.

 

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

The scroll’s fifth seal reveals those who will be martyred for their faith in Christ during the tribulation  Again you are 2000 years off. John is at the beginning of the church age, you are 2000 years later. Stop and think for a moment: any martyr of the 70th week would KNOW they have only to wait out the week. On the other hand, take Stephen: killed at the beginning of the church age: he would have had NO IDEA how long it would be before judgment would come. That is why they asked. The church age it seems will be around 2000 years long. And martyrs are STILL BEING ADDED. (John has not yet arrived at the 70th week in his narrative.) Judgment is not going to come until the full number of church age martyrs is killed. 

 

Not true. Well, it is if one has no clue about what is happening at the end. Let me point out to the big problem with the logic here.

It could be anytime no matter when they asked. The answer to the question was, "they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they [were], should be fulfilled." It's not a time nor is it limited. It's a condition that must be reached in a specific way for a specific set of people. They must be "killed as they [were]" and there is a specific set "that should be killed" and it has to be a specific number that  must be reached that it "should be fulfilled".  A time element has no bearing.  No martyr could know timing no matter when they sacrificed their life as time isn't even mentioned. That's your interpretation.

On 12/28/2019 at 4:04 PM, iamlamad said:

After the opening of the sixth of the seven seals is an interlude in the book of Revelation. John describes the 144,000 Jews who will be protected during the tribulation (Revelation 7:1–8)  How astute of you! You have proven that the "tribulation" is FUTURE not past (as in the first seals). Good job!  Suppose you are watching a play with several "acts" and curtains that close between acts: what happens behind the curtains after it closes? They are rearranging the set to fit the next act.  This is exactly what John is doing in chapter 7. You see, the 7th seal officially starts the 70th week. In the mind of God, TWO EVENTS must happen before the 7th seal can start the 70th week: the church MUST BE seen in heaven, and the 144,000 MUST be sealed for their protection. Once God accomplishes these two things, then the 70th week can begin. And it will - with the 7th seal opening. 

 

Matt 24:30-31 is the same set of events as Rev 6:12-17, which only comes after the Midpoint of the week and after great tribulation. More than half the week is over by the time of the 6th seal.

Also, the 6th seal and the 7th trump are connected in time and space.

"And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"

" And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth."

Unless you are saying wrath comes twice. You would have to since God's wrath begins at the 6th seal, which you acknowledge, but then again at the 7th trump, as scripture says above.

It's more plausible to stay with the arrangement of scripture. The seals are the overview and everything else happens within that parameter. The seals open and by the time of the fifth seal 6 trumps have sounded. We are taken at the last trump and since that is the 7th trump of Revelation, the 7th trump must sound in conjunction with the 6th seal, either just before, at the same time or just after.

 

 

[iamlamad]

58 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Hmm...So it's 95 AD but it's 33 AD? Jesus was worthy in 33 AD but not in 95 AD. Jesus dies and is raised from the dead in 33 AD, but still dead and unworthy in 95 AD?  John is shown in vision in 95 AD, but it's still 33 AD? Sure you got a handle on this?

John was exiled to Patmos by Diocletian circa 90 AD or so. You expect us to believe it's 95 AD on earth but 33 AD in heaven? Do you really believe that?

This is not difficult: it was around 95 AD (according to the Catholics and others) when John saw a vision. A vision can be of the past, present or future or all three mixed together. At the beginning of the vision, John saw the Resurrected Jesus - probably in his time: 95 AD. But when in the vision John was called up to heaven, it was around 32 AD in the vision. 

God wanted to introduce John to the BOOK, but He (God) chose to show John the book while it was still in the hand of the Father. That was a problem because Jesus got the book from the Father around 32 AD when He ascended back into the throne room.  Therefore, in the vision, God had to show John clues to the correct timing:

A throne room with Jesus NOT SEEN at the right hand of the Father - when there is a dozen verses telling us that is where He should have been seen in 95 AD.

A throne room with the Holy Spirit present - when Jesus said He would send Him down as soon as He ascended.

A search for one worthy that ended in failure - no man was found worthy to take the book.

Then TIME PASSED (in the vision) and Jesus rose from the dead. THEN He was found worthy to take the book. 

Then more time passed and Jesus ascended back into heaven (in the vision) and immediately sent the Holy Spirit down.

Next, the first thing Jesus did after He entered the throne room was get the book into HIS hands and begin opening the seals.

Again, this is not a difficult concept.

The truth then, it was 95 AD all through this vision and after the vision when John wrote out what he saw. But INSIDE the vision, time changes - and God chose to begin while Jesus was still on earth - or under the earth.

Edited December 30, 2019 by iamlamad

[Diaste]

10 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

A throne room with Jesus NOT SEEN at the right hand of the Father - when there is a dozen verses telling us that is where He should have been seen in 95 AD.

Illogical. It's proving a negative. No direct testimony that Jesus was not there exists. Hence, false conclusion.

If there is no evidence of absence then there may not be absence at all.

And if you have a dozen verses telling you He is at the right hand of the Father, why do you make up stuff that cannot be true?

Seems a dozen bits of evidence all saying the same thing would convince you. But it doesn't. Why is that?

Edited December 30, 2019 by Diaste

[Diaste]

12 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Again, this is not a difficult concept.

The truth then, it was 95 AD all through this vision and after the vision when John wrote out what he saw. But INSIDE the vision, time changes - and God chose to begin while Jesus was still on earth - or under the earth.

Apparently it is. A dozen scriptures all say Jesus is at the right hand of the Father but you ignore them. I don't think the difficulty is external.

[Last Daze]

14 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

A throne room with Jesus NOT SEEN at the right hand of the Father - when there is a dozen verses telling us that is where He should have been seen in 95 AD.

The throne room scene of Rev 4 & 5 is a flashback to 33 AD for the purpose of establishing the worthiness of Jesus to open the seals (Matthew 28:18).  It does not mean that Jesus immediately took the scroll and began opening the seals in 33 AD.  In fact, it can't mean that since the opening of the seals takes place AFTER the seven letters to the seven Gentile churches.  The seven churches did not exist in 33 AD.  If you open the door to time-travelling then it all becomes meaningless.

[iamlamad]

58 minutes ago, Diaste said:

...

The word 'white' is an adjective. It carries no meaning other than a descriptor of a noun. No object, we have nothing. It is used to describe a noun such as flower, leprosy, snow, etc. The 17 times it is used in Rev it's describing wool, snow, a stone, attire, a throne, a cloud and thrice white is the adjective describing a horse.  I'll cite the relevant passages:

Revelation 1:14

The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire.

Revelation 2:17

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to the one who receives it.

Revelation 3:4

Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy.

Revelation 3:5

The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels.

Revelation 3:18

I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.

Revelation 4:4

Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads.

Revelation 6:2

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

Revelation 6:11

Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been.

Revelation 7:9

After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

Revelation 7:13

Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”

Revelation 7:14

I answered, “Sir, you know.” And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Revelation 14:14

 I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand.

Revelation 19:11

 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war.

Revelation 19:14

The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean.

Revelation 20:11

Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them.

It looks like two times white is directly associated with righteousness; "they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.", and "They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy." The other 7 times white attire is described we only assume it's associated with righteousness as the text is only unequivocal in Rev 3:4 and 7:14. But I'll give it to you that any white attire seen in Revelation is symbolic of purity of the wearer. 

That leaves a stone, hair, wool, snow, throne, horses and a cloud also described as white. I have not seen where any of the aforementioned are symbolic of righteousness. This is, "It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright [and] clean; for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints." Here the scripture says fine linen is symbolic of righteousness. It's not described as white. Mostly we assume it's white but we don't know that. White in Rev is 'leukos'. In the above from Rev 19:7 it's 'lampros' which is shining, magnificent, bright, splendid. Literally the only time we see the righteousness of the saints described it's shining, dazzling, stunning attire, not described as white but as brilliant light.

But again, I'll give it to you that wearing white clothes, any time it's mentioned, is symbolic of righteousness for the wearer. I believe that as well. Since the symbolism marking the righteousness of the saints is very specific one should not assume every mention of the color white is symbolic of the same. I don't see where clouds, or hair, or a throne, or a stone, speaks to righteousness of the saints.

But we have horses. Three times horses are mentioned as white. A great commander and his army are mounted on white steeds riding to battle. A conquering army is on the way, all astride white horses. This is the example we can relate to Rev 6:2.  A commander astride a white horse. Since the image is one of a conquering army riding to battle in Rev 19 then in Rev 6 this is also a commander on a white horse and not the Gospel. "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." 

If you could post chapter and verse likening the Gospel with a horse, rider, arrows and with a conquering bent, I would appreciate that.

...

The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow  Does this represent something good or something evil?

I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to the one who receives it.  Does this represent something good or something evil?

 

They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy.  Does this represent something good or something evil?

The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white.  Does this represent something good or something evil?

and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness;  Does this represent something good or something evil?

They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold  Does this represent something good or something evil?

Then each of them was given a white robe,  Does this represent something good or something evil?

They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands  Does this represent something good or something evil?

These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”  Does this represent something good or something evil?

they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.  Does this represent something good or something evil?

before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man  Does this represent something good or something evil?

 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True  Does this represent something good or something evil?

The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean.Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it.  Does this represent something good or something evil?

In every other case, John uses the color white to represent something GOOD, something related to God and to heaven.  Yet, some people imagine John would just "white" 16 times to represent something good, and something related to God and to heaven, and then once to represent something evil. I simply don't buy it. It is not something God would do. If we want to see what color God used to represent evil, John used "fiery red." 

As to horses, many times in the Old Testament a horse is used to represent war. In fact, John tells us this horse and rider are going out to overcome or conquer.  I submit that when the Antichrist (as the man of sin) commits the first thing covered in scripture - confirming a covenant - it will NOT be war! It will be more like Antiochus Epiphanes gained the throne - through intrigue. He will not begin war until after the abomination.  For those that insist the first seal is to represent John's first mention of the man of sin, it simply does not fit.

When we take in the CONTEXT - Jesus ascending back into heaven and sending the Holy Spirit down, then immediately taking the book from the Father and then opening the first seal - it simply does not fit at all. I understand many people pull this verse out of John's written context. Anyone can make the bible say most anything if they are willing to pull a verse out of its context. 

[Last Daze]

3 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

In every other case, John uses the color white to represent something GOOD, something related to God and to heaven.  Yet, some people imagine John would just "white" 16 times to represent something good, and something related to God and to heaven, and then once to represent something evil. I simply don't buy it. It is not something God would do. If we want to see what color God used to represent evil, John used "fiery red." 

Using this line of reasoning, why would God include a righteous white horse in with the horses of war, famine, death, and hades?

[iamlamad]

Just now, Last Daze said:

The throne room scene of Rev 4 & 5 is a flashback to 33 AD for the purpose of establishing the worthiness of Jesus to open the seals (Matthew 28:18).  It does not mean that Jesus immediately took the scroll and began opening the seals in 33 AD.  In fact, it can't mean that since the opening of the seals takes place AFTER the seven letters to the seven Gentile churches.  The seven churches did not exist in 33 AD.  If you open the door to time-travelling then it all becomes meaningless.

The 7 churches CERTAINLY existed in 95 AD. I like your use of "flashback." Thanks for your support: most people will not admit God gave John a "flashback" in the vision - back to a time before Christ rose from the dead. 

I must ask this: can you find 2ooo years in any of those verses before or after Jesus got the book into His hands? I cannot. I cannot even find a hint trying to read between the lines. Why would that be? It is simple: Jesus got the book and began opening the seals as soon as He ascended. 

Take a few steps back and look at the big picture: to get Satan removed from his throne as the spiritual leader (god) of this world, the book MUST get opened.  I would think "the sooner the better."  Then consider that this book with 7 seals is a LEGAL document created in the throne room of heaven. NOTHING inside the book or involving any seals can legally come to pass UNTIL someone is found worthy to take the book. In other words, to get Satan kicked off his throne, it is IMPERATIVE that someone be found worthy. It was therefore also imperative that the seals be opened as soon as possible to start the countdown to the 7th trumpet so that Satan is removed from his position. In other words, God cannot send out the church (the first seal) unil someone is found worthy to open that seal. 

I am SURE Satan demanded that if GOd was to send out His church, then he, Satan, must be allowed to attempt to stop the church, using war, famine, pestilence and wild beasts. And he would be allowed to make martyrs. But then God limited him in these efforts to only 1/4 of the earth. 

What REALLY happens after chapter 3 when John wrote, "after this?" It is simple: a transitional phrase to represent a change or transition: God was finished dictating the messages to the churches (95 AD) and was going to begin a vision about the BOOK.  The timing of the last verse of chapter 3 was 95 AD and the timing of the first verse of chapter 4 was 95 AD. That was when John was called up. But immediately in the vision God used a flashback. It is not a difficult concept. The question is, WHY a flashback? I submit God does not waste words: He showed John a throne room with Jesus absent for a purpose: to show timing. 

Did you ever consider the 5th seal?  A 70th week martyr would know they only had to wait out the rest of the 7 years - so no need to ask "how long..." On the other hand, consider Stephen: he had no idea how long it would be before judgment would come. The 5th seal is church age martyrs, not 70th week martyrs. John does not even open the 70th week until the 7th seal. And the days of GT that will CAUSE the martyrs will not be until after chapter 14! People want to jump ahead of John. In chapter 6, John is in the church age! He does not end the church age and begin judgment until the 6th seal. 

In fact, John gives us a strong hint as to the time of the rapture that will end the church age at the 5th seal. They are told that judgment is not coming until the full number of martyrs has come to pass.  What would be the cause of the last church martyr? Of course, if the church age ENDED, the next martyr would be a 70th week martyr. John's next verse is the 6th seal where judgment begins. John is telling us that the rapture comes between the 5th seal and the 6th.

I understand, sometimes flashbacks can be difficult.  

[iamlamad]

13 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

Using this line of reasoning, why would God include a righteous white horse in with the horses of war, famine, death, and hades?

Very simple, the white horse is to represent the gospel going forth, while the other horses represent the devil's attempts to stop the gospel. 

Did you ever notice how John linked the Red, the Black and the Pale together, but left out the White? Notice:

Rev. 6:8 ...And ^[f]power was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, with hunger, with death, and by the beasts of the earth.

The sword is the 2nd seal, the red horse and WAR.

The Hunger is the 3rd seal, the black horse, and famine.

The Death is the 4th seal, the pale horse, and pestilence.

Where then is the white horse? Why is he left out of this mix? It is very simple: the white horse is the church with the gospel, while these three are trying to STOP the gospel.

[Diaste]

3 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Does this represent something good or something evil?

Not the point.  There is no connotation of good or evil in the verse. "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 are reading that into this. It's not the gospel in any case. Show me verses where the gospel is likened to anything. Anything at all.

9 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

In every other case, John uses the color white to represent something GOOD, something related to God and to heaven.  Yet, some people imagine John would just "white" 16 times to represent something good, and something related to God and to heaven, and then once to represent something evil. I simply don't buy it. It is not something God would do. If we want to see what color God used to represent evil, John used "fiery red." 

The representation is that of a conqueror. The white horse is the symbol of conquest. It is used when Jesus and His armies return. That's all it is. Nothing more. Not good or bad. In fact Jesus would be a far better interpretation of Rev 6:2 than the gospel since Jesus is named and depicted riding a white horse.

12 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

As to horses, many times in the Old Testament a horse is used to represent war. In fact, John tells us this horse and rider are going out to overcome or conquer.  I submit that when the Antichrist (as the man of sin) commits the first thing covered in scripture - confirming a covenant - it will NOT be war! It will be more like Antiochus Epiphanes gained the throne - through intrigue. He will not begin war until after the abomination.  For those that insist the first seal is to represent John's first mention of the man of sin, it simply does not fit.

And? It's still conquering and your thoughts on the matter do not preclude war. Where does scripture say 'no war till after the A of D'? In fact Jesus says in Matt 24 there will be wars and rumors of wars well before the A of D. I cannot rule out the beast as prosecutor of those wars, or some of them, or none of them. No evidence either way. It's just your thoughts. Unless you can provide scripture to that effect.

Again, the first seal rider could more easily be interpreted as Jesus than the gospel as Jesus is riding a white horse and coming to battle. So then why isn't the 1st seal rider going to war? So you are admitting that horses mean war and the rider conquerors ergo, not the gospel.

19 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

When we take in the CONTEXT - Jesus ascending back into heaven and sending the Holy Spirit down, then immediately taking the book from the Father and then opening the first seal - it simply does not fit at all. I understand many people pull this verse out of John's written context. Anyone can make the bible say most anything if they are willing to pull a verse out of its context. 

What doesn't fit? No one is saying, "then immediately taking the book from the Father and then opening the first seal ". You are saying this. It's not out of context. The context is the end of the age. The end of the age cannot begin until we are in the generation that sees all these things. No one knows when that is. But since all of those things have not come to pass then no generation alive or dead has seen even one seal open.