John's 7 visions and triangulating with other scriptures

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

Were you thinking before the antichrist is revealed, THEN he is limited to 1/4 of the world, but after He will be given authority over the entire world? 

I don't think so. He has made full use of the 1/4, starting two world wars, countless famines, epidemics that have killed millions - all in the 1/4 allowed. 

You show a complete ignorance of what has been presented herein. Read what I wrote again, You are making something overcomplicated that is simple.

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

Sorry, but It was a man's NAME! The whole group who got into his was was named after HIM. His name could have meant ANYTHING in Greek.

Do You Know what Balaam's error is? Here is what Strong's says of them. a sect mentioned in Rev. 2:6,15, who were charged with holding the error of Balaam, casting a stumbling block before the church of God by upholding the liberty of eating things sacrificed to idols as well as committing fornication.

Balaam's error is an error associated with False prophets who prophecy for Gain, In the case of Nicolaitans it was for power in the church... ruling over the Laity. The name fits the deed.

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

AFTER chapter 13 he will do exactly that. He will enter the most holy place in the temple where ONLY GOD was suppose to be.  I DO see this. What I do not see is your theory about all this. 

Refer to my opening post on the topic again. Again, you are failing to comprehend simple logic here, I am presenting a case that is unique to what you have been taught before a simple way to understand revelation but because your mind is so convoluted on the teachings of men you cannot nor will not even listen... You have no ears to hear. Chapter 13 is discussing the abomination of desolation as well as the time of Great tribulation.... The abomination of desolation is the first event to happen in the final week as per Matthew 24:14-15. I Am using the timeline now of the Olivet discourse and the timeline of the fall feasts to explain the timeline in revelation, they all match when you understand the birth pangs, conception and Joy of the Human life cycle... Your sorrow will turn to Joy, is the whole concept of the fall feasts. Even a child can understand this. About the only ones who cannot are those who want to rule over the Laity and make revelation a scholarly book to be only understood by the literate and well educated, if you catch my drift? God is not the Author of confusion.  

[dhchristian]

9 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Wow! You have it all laid out. Who am I do disagree with what the Spirit has shown you?  

Oh well. When the day comes that we will know as we are now known, then we will see. I really hope for your sake that your theory survives that day.

I Bet you have not even considered this in your formation of your timeline? There is so much more to this as well, but for brevities sake I will leave it there.

Once you identify the Birth, then you will see the regathering of Israel as well, which comes after the birth...

Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel. (Micah 5:3)

Just like what I Wrote in my topic the fulness of the Gentiles. It is all one cohesive whole, and all of it flows together simply and logically. The Book of revelation is written to the church, not to Israel, Israel is barely mentioned in the book. So much of what Paul wrote in his epistles is prophetic, and point to these timelines, But most scholars only focus on one or two passages in Thessalonains and a couple of verses in 1 Cor. 15, But they ignore Romans 8-11, Colosians and Ephesians. Not to mention what Peter wrote, what Hebrews 10:1 says and what John wrote in their epistles. When you understand the birthing process in the chronology and how this is the structure of the fall feasts, this opens up so many more scriptures as prophetic, and adds to that glorious Plan of our Savior And redeemer. Not only is there a simplicity there, but there is also a depth and an understanding of the Wisdom of God. You are missing out on this. Ask yourself, can a birth occur without the pains of Labor?

God Bless  

[iamlamad]

16 minutes ago, dhchristian said:

I Bet you have not even considered this in your formation of your timeline? There is so much more to this as well, but for brevities sake I will leave it there.

Once you identify the Birth, then you will see the regathering of Israel as well, which comes after the birth...

Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel. (Micah 5:3)

Just like what I Wrote in my topic the fulness of the Gentiles. It is all one cohesive whole, and all of it flows together simply and logically. The Book of revelation is written to the church, not to Israel, Israel is barely mentioned in the book. So much of what Paul wrote in his epistles is prophetic, and point to these timelines, But most scholars only focus on one or two passages in Thessalonains and a couple of verses in 1 Cor. 15, But they ignore Romans 8-11, Colosians and Ephesians. Not to mention what Peter wrote, what Hebrews 10:1 says and what John wrote in their epistles. When you understand the birthing process in the chronology and how this is the structure of the fall feasts, this opens up so many more scriptures as prophetic, and adds to that glorious Plan of our Savior And redeemer. Not only is there a simplicity there, but there is also a depth and an understanding of the Wisdom of God. You are missing out on this. Ask yourself, can a birth occur without the pains of Labor?

God Bless  

The Book of revelation is written to the church, not to Israel...

Wow! It seems you and I are reading a different book! I see it as mostly a book for the Jews. The 7 churches were Jewish churches. The 70th week is for Daniel's people as Daniel has written. In Revelation, that covers chapters 8 through 16. Those that flee will be mostly Jews. There may be some Gentiles included in the "remnant" that loves Jesus in chapter 12. God chose not even to show John the great event of the rapture of the mostly Gentile church. 

[iamlamad]

10 hours ago, dhchristian said:

You show a complete ignorance of what has been presented herein. Read what I wrote again, You are making something overcomplicated that is simple.

I would like to see your timeline. That would make it simple. 

[iamlamad]

9 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Do You Know what Balaam's error is? Here is what Strong's says of them. a sect mentioned in Rev. 2:6,15, who were charged with holding the error of Balaam, casting a stumbling block before the church of God by upholding the liberty of eating things sacrificed to idols as well as committing fornication.

Balaam's error is an error associated with False prophets who prophecy for Gain, In the case of Nicolaitans it was for power in the church... ruling over the Laity. The name fits the deed.

Since you arrived at the Nicolatiatans by way of the word "conquer" and "conquering," which was translated as "overcome" and "overcoming" every other place in the KJV, it really does not matter in our discussion of Revelation. It turned out to be a red herring. 

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, iamlamad said:

I would like to see your timeline. That would make it simple.

I Have told you already, Birthpangs= church age tribulation, The birth itself=Great tribulation, a specific 3.5 year time, Followed by the season of Joy= The sixth seal rapture. This is the simple timeline given by the fall feasts, which are a shadow of things to come, and confirmed by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse where the language of Birth pangs is used, and by Paul in 2 Thess. 2 When seen with this framework in mind. Now we go to 90Ad and John gives us Revelation, to which we take that GIVEN framework, and apply it. When you do, it all makes sense. You are trying to work backward from a preconceived timeline you were taught as a child in church, and beginning in revelation and using it to explain the Olivet discourse, of course your timeline is going to be different. 

If You would start from Pauline ignorance, try and learn you would arrive at the same conclusion I do, But you start from a preconceived timeline and try to make everything else fit. Revelation should be the last book you read, as this was the last book to be revealed to the church. Do You understand this methodology of approaching prophecy? Revelation ADDS to the already existing and verified timeline given by the Torah feasts and the Olivet teachings of Jesus, and adds details to this timeline, You start with revelation and try to fit the less detailed into the convoluted mess full of parenthesis that your timeline adds. If You start with what the early church pre 70ad understood and then add revelation to it, it makes perfect sense.   

2 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Wow! It seems you and I are reading a different book! I see it as mostly a book for the Jews. The 7 churches were Jewish churches. The 70th week is for Daniel's people as Daniel has written. In Revelation, that covers chapters 8 through 16. Those that flee will be mostly Jews. There may be some Gentiles included in the "remnant" that loves Jesus in chapter 12. God chose not even to show John the great event of the rapture of the mostly Gentile church. 

The Book of revelation is written to seven churches in Asia minor. Though there were Jewish converts therein, these churches were predominantly Gentile churches. The church is the church, Israel is Israel, Mixing the two gets into the errors of Replacement theology or conversely the errors of the Hebrew Roots teachers. Israel proper is only mentioned with regard to the 144000 of the 12 tribes of Israel in the book of Revelation. The earthly temple is mentioned only in chapter 11 regarding the two witnesses, Apart from these passages the prophecy is written to the church.     

2 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Since you arrived at the Nicolatiatans by way of the word "conquer" and "conquering," which was translated as "overcome" and "overcoming" every other place in the KJV, it really does not matter in our discussion of Revelation. It turned out to be a red herring. 

There are two mentions of the Nicolaitans Both in Rev. 2. One of them associates them with Balaam's error. Early church writings indicate that the Nicolas who became one of the deacons along with Stephen in Acts 6 fell away from the truth, and started the Nicolaitan sect. That is all we know about them. The Word Nicolaitan comes from the words Nike which means to conquer, and Laos which means the people from which we get the word Laity from. This also a root of the Word Laodicea which means justice of the People. Nicolaitans is defined as "destruction of the people" according to Strong's. The concept is a conquering and a ruling over of the Laity of the church. Which is exactly what false apostles and false prophets do by placing themselves in seats of authority above the people dictating to them what they should believe, Just like the Pope, or your typical cult leader who uses mystical manipulation to rule over the mind of the followers and lead them to error. I Can think of one such false prophet that I have dealt with who says he is receiving words from God that are to be treated like scripture, and there are many who believe this guys rubbish despite me showing them how his words contradict the Word of God and Jesus Himself, Yet they are so lulled by his gentle tone and manipulation and mind control. We Have been dealing with these sorts of people since the very onset of the church age. Balaam's error is alive and well today, many of them in the leadership of mainline churches as well.   

[iamlamad]

5 hours ago, dhchristian said:

I Have told you already, Birthpangs= church age tribulation, The birth itself=Great tribulation, a specific 3.5 year time, Followed by the season of Joy= The sixth seal rapture. This is the simple timeline given by the fall feasts, which are a shadow of things to come, and confirmed by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse where the language of Birth pangs is used, and by Paul in 2 Thess. 2 When seen with this framework in mind. Now we go to 90Ad and John gives us Revelation, to which we take that GIVEN framework, and apply it. When you do, it all makes sense. You are trying to work backward from a preconceived timeline you were taught as a child in church, and beginning in revelation and using it to explain the Olivet discourse, of course your timeline is going to be different. 

If You would start from Pauline ignorance, try and learn you would arrive at the same conclusion I do, But you start from a preconceived timeline and try to make everything else fit. Revelation should be the last book you read, as this was the last book to be revealed to the church. Do You understand this methodology of approaching prophecy? Revelation ADDS to the already existing and verified timeline given by the Torah feasts and the Olivet teachings of Jesus, and adds details to this timeline, You start with revelation and try to fit the less detailed into the convoluted mess full of parenthesis that your timeline adds. If You start with what the early church pre 70ad understood and then add revelation to it, it makes perfect sense.   

The Book of revelation is written to seven churches in Asia minor. Though there were Jewish converts therein, these churches were predominantly Gentile churches. The church is the church, Israel is Israel, Mixing the two gets into the errors of Replacement theology or conversely the errors of the Hebrew Roots teachers. Israel proper is only mentioned with regard to the 144000 of the 12 tribes of Israel in the book of Revelation. The earthly temple is mentioned only in chapter 11 regarding the two witnesses, Apart from these passages the prophecy is written to the church.     

There are two mentions of the Nicolaitans Both in Rev. 2. One of them associates them with Balaam's error. Early church writings indicate that the Nicolas who became one of the deacons along with Stephen in Acts 6 fell away from the truth, and started the Nicolaitan sect. That is all we know about them. The Word Nicolaitan comes from the words Nike which means to conquer, and Laos which means the people from which we get the word Laity from. This also a root of the Word Laodicea which means justice of the People. Nicolaitans is defined as "destruction of the people" according to Strong's. The concept is a conquering and a ruling over of the Laity of the church. Which is exactly what false apostles and false prophets do by placing themselves in seats of authority above the people dictating to them what they should believe, Just like the Pope, or your typical cult leader who uses mystical manipulation to rule over the mind of the followers and lead them to error. I Can think of one such false prophet that I have dealt with who says he is receiving words from God that are to be treated like scripture, and there are many who believe this guys rubbish despite me showing them how his words contradict the Word of God and Jesus Himself, Yet they are so lulled by his gentle tone and manipulation and mind control. We Have been dealing with these sorts of people since the very onset of the church age. Balaam's error is alive and well today, many of them in the leadership of mainline churches as well.   

I Have told you already, Birthpangs= church age tribulation  KJV = beginning of sorrows. Finally something we agree on! Praise the Lord forever!  Sorry, but the bible really does not speak of the actual birth - but I get your point.

The birth itself=Great tribulation, a specific 3.5 year time, Followed by the season of Joy= The sixth seal rapture.  You know I disagree here. It really is clear, the days of GT Jesus spoke of in Matthew are in the second half of the week and begin in chapter 15.  You came to your conclusion in error because Jesus skipped over the first half of the week in Matthew 24, and landed right at the midpoint. You are forming doctrine from that one source, in error, when other scriptures show it is error.  Jesus just hit the high points.  But again, one point we may agree on: I believe the rapture will trigger the 6th seal events - so come a moment before.

by Paul in 2 Thess. 2   Sorry, but I don't think you understand Paul in 2 thes. 2.  He is telling us that the departing must come first. First before what? First before the man of sin can be revealed.  It is truly the only way that passage makes sense logically.

According to Paul in 2 Thes. 2:

1. Departing as in the rapture comes first: the one restraining "taken out of the way."

2. The man of sin then revealed. At this point all will know that THE DAY has started.

Now we go to 90Ad and John gives us Revelation, to which we take that GIVEN framework  MISTAKE! Revelation is the most complete work on the end times. Doctrine should be FORMED in Revelation and missing pieces filled in from shorter treatises. If you had started in Revelation you would KNOW the days of GT must come after God's warning in chapter 14. You started in error so it grows.

When you do, it all makes sense.   You imagine it does. I see your theory as counterfeit. It is back to the $100 dollar bill. Bankers know it so well they can immediately spot a counterfeit.  John has the days of GT Jesus spoke of after the warning in chapter 14. You would have to do a lot of rearranging to make your theory fit. It is the "draw out of the hat" chronology.  No thanks. I am sticking with John's chronology! 

You are trying to work backward from a preconceived timeline you were taught as a child in church  Totally wrong. When God pushed me into Revelation I came with an empty slated and waited for Him to teach me. The problem is, you don't agree with what He taught.  Remember, the VERY FIRST THING He sent me to find was the exact midpoint "clearly marked." I doubt if you have a midpoint. You sure don't agree with the 7th trump. as the midpoint. That would not work for you, for Jesus said it would be AFTER the ABOMINATION that the days of GT would start.  I know therefore that the days of GT Jesus spoke of will most certainly be AFTER the 7th trumpet that marks the midpoint.

It seems then that Jesus, the head of the church, thought that the midpoint abomination would be a good starting point. I have worked from that point forward and back so I know where the 70th week is. I also know where it is not. Your theory is simply impossible.

DH, I do have a suggestion: drop everything and FIND the 70th week: starting point, midpoint and ending point.  It would be a huge help in places things like the days of GT.

By the way, it just makes common sense to form theory from the MOST COMPLETE treatise on the end times.

If You would start from Pauline ignorance, try and learn you would arrive at the same conclusion I do  No, because your first triangulation point was found in error. Jesus skipped over the first half of the week, so it appears in Matthew 24 that the abomination is at the start of the week. The truth is, the man of sin is not even revealed until the midpoint. When he enters the temple, as per Paul, that will be the abomination Jesus spoke of, and the event that divides the week as Daniel said. You could easily find the time of the abomination just by finding when those in judea flee.  But you would have to let go of your current theory. It is VERY doubtful that will happen. Note: when you begin in error, every step you take gets you farther from the truth. 

Do You understand this methodology of approaching prophecy?   Of course I understand, but it lacks common sense. It goes back to my bible college professor: He said "wisdom decrees that we form our doctrine from the most complete treatise on a subject, and fill in missing pieces from the lesser scriptures."  We should START in Revelation, not end there! Jesus only hit the high points, skipping over many things. Just for example, did Jesus mention trumpet judgments?  I suppose, a well done fake $100 bill would "make perfect sense" to a beginning bank clerk. 

these churches were predominantly Gentile churches  I would challenge this. Is there any way we can prove this? Paul said that he alone went to the Gentiles and all the 11 went to ministry to the Jews. I think these were Jewish churches. 

The church is the church, Israel is Israel, Mixing the two gets into the errors   And you stated that Revelation was mostly for the Gentile church. I corrected you by showing that chapters 8 through 16 are Daniel's 70th week and for the JEWS.  You don't understand that. The church is taken out a moment before the 6th seal - so the rest is about the Jews and only the remnant of the Gentiles. Daniel TOLD us that the 70th week was for HIS PEOPLE. 

Are you beginning to see why I disagree so much with you?

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

Now we go to 90Ad and John gives us Revelation, to which we take that GIVEN framework  MISTAKE! Revelation is the most complete work on the end times. Doctrine should be FORMED in Revelation and missing pieces filled in from shorter treatises. If you had started in Revelation you would KNOW the days of GT must come after God's warning in chapter 14. You started in error so it grows.

Since our difference boil down to this I will address this. When You teach someone science, do you start them off with a college level science textbook? How about teaching someone Mathematics, do you begin with advanced Calculus? NO... I Think you would agree with this. You start with a foundation of 2+2=4 and then you build upon that foundation. All of Scripture is like this from the Old to the new, and even Paul calls the Torah our schoolmaster... This is known as the progressive revelation of scripture.

The Philosophical fallacy that you are falling victim to is a causation fallacy. This fallacy goes both ways, one to over simplification, the other to over complexification of causality. To begin with an overly complex view is to confuse and obfuscate the Truth and the process of learning. How this works typically is that one looks at the details of a text to the minutia, and is unable to see the Big Picture of the narrative, and the plot of the text. Over simplification works the other way and ignores the minutia and details and sees only the narrative. One is like teaching a first grader college level calculus, the other is like telling a first grader that they are done learning Math once they learn to add and subtract. If You are not studying scripture from this progressive revelation understanding, then you are highly likely to misinterpret, and misunderstand the meaning and intent of the text. In Eschatology, this shows up in overly complex theories and timelines (trust me I have seen some doozies) that the average person looking at and sees a totally foreign language written therein. Those who over simplify eschatology just ignore eschatology altogether.... Likely because they took one look at one of the convoluted timelines and ignore prophecy altogether or have a child like understanding of it.

What I am trying to show here is the progressive revelation that is contained in scriptures of the end times. The first "prophecy" arguably in scripture goes right back to the fall of man and the curses given, and that being the curse on the Woman of pain in childbirth. I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;   This Curse of the fall is what the end times is all about, that creation may be restored. This example of travail is used throughout scripture prophetically each time more and more complexity and revelation being added. The First advent was based on a birth, and travail, and the cross, What happens at the second advent will be similar but more complex. Just like the Spring feasts foreshadowed the first advent in exactly the order they are celebrated, so too are the fall feasts a foreshadow of the second advent. There is a simplicity to this, Ye there is also details that make this unfolding occur. When You actually approach the framework of revelation with this framework in mind you will find that structure in the text.