John's 7 visions and triangulating with other scriptures

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, dhchristian said:

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.

I will stick to the simplicity that Revelation is to be understood as written - a very chronological narrative of the end times, from the start of the Day of the Lord at the 6th seal to the start of the 7th week at the 7th seal, all the way to the end of the week at the 7th vial. No imagination needed: just read and believe.  Why is that so difficult for some?

Some say John does a lot of "backpedaling." Some add parenthesis everywhere. Some imagine layers, others imagine rooms, and some even imagine it in 3D. No, God did not make it a hiding, He made it a revealing. In most cases, the most simply meaning to a verse is the one intended by the Author. If one can count to 7, they can understand, 7 seals in a row that lead to 7 trumpets in a row that lead to 7 vials and end the week.

This matches exactly with what Jesus said, only Jesus touched on the high points, and added a couple things John did not see so did not write. It therefore takes ALL the end times scriptures together. The right theory fits all the scriptures. I think you and I will continue to disagree on much of Revelation. I will believe what Jesus taught me over what anyone else may teach.  It is like a real US $100 bill versus a counterfeit. The real is the only one that works.

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

I will stick to the simplicity that Revelation is to be understood as written - a very chronological narrative of the end times, from the start of the Day of the Lord at the 6th seal to the start of the 7th week at the 7th seal, all the way to the end of the week at the 7th vial. No imagination needed: just read and believe.  Why is that so difficult for some?

Some say John does a lot of "backpedaling." Some add parenthesis everywhere. Some imagine layers, others imagine rooms, and some even imagine it in 3D. No, God did not make it a hiding, He made it a revealing. In most cases, the most simply meaning to a verse is the one intended by the Author. If one can count to 7, they can understand, 7 seals in a row that lead to 7 trumpets in a row that lead to 7 vials and end the week.

This matches exactly with what Jesus said, only Jesus touched on the high points, and added a couple things John did not see so did not write. It therefore takes ALL the end times scriptures together. The right theory fits all the scriptures. I think you and I will continue to disagree on much of Revelation. I will believe what Jesus taught me over what anyone else may teach.  It is like a real US $100 bill versus a counterfeit. The real is the only one that works.

I Noticed that you did not address any of the points I made. HMM?

All of scripture is the revelation of Jesus Christ. The last chapter just has the title of the book. I Have pointed out inconsistencies and contradictions in your theory already numerous times, the fact that you refuse to admit your error speaks of another issue altogether.  There are all kinds of Holes in your timeline that you are unable to fix, and unwilling to even consider, such as the whole two witnesses and seventh trumpet Paradox... that the two witnesses witness after the middle of the week yet they are killed before the middle of the week, which according to you The seventh trumpet is the middle of the week. With such a glaring error You obviously do not have it figured out. I Personally would stop blaming Jesus for giving you glaring errors such as this, Only the mind of man can produce these sorts of errors. I am not denying your faith, But I am denying the authority of the source of your teachings. 

 

[iamlamad]

1 minute ago, dhchristian said:

I Noticed that you did not address any of the points I made. HMM?

All of scripture is the revelation of Jesus Christ. The last chapter just has the title of the book. I Have pointed out inconsistencies and contradictions in your theory already numerous times, the fact that you refuse to admit your error speaks of another issue altogether.  There are all kinds of Holes in your timeline that you are unable to fix, and unwilling to even consider, such as the whole two witnesses and seventh trumpet Paradox... that the two witnesses witness after the middle of the week yet they are killed before the middle of the week, which according to you The seventh trumpet is the middle of the week. With such a glaring error You obviously do not have it figured out. I Personally would stop blaming Jesus for giving you glaring errors such as this, Only the mind of man can produce these sorts of errors. I am not denying your faith, But I am denying the authority of the source of your teachings. 

This time you did not make a lot of points I disagreed with. 

For your first paragraph: the result of your theory is very showing: imagining that the abomination starts the week. Now, if you understand John's timeline and compared what Jesus said with what John wrote, you would know Jesus skipped over the first half of the week.  We need BOTH Revelation and the OD. But I still think it wise to start in Revelation. It is not a point I would argue. For sure the OD is easier to understand. But if people rely on that alone for doctrine, you have proven they can easily get into error.

This fallacy goes both ways, one to over simplification, the other to over complexification of causality.  Time I time again I have cautioned people to quit staring at one tree, back up a few hundred paces and see the entire forest. In my opinion, you make Revelation FAR more complicated than John did. 

I cannot disagree with the rest of your post. 

Please, pick ONE HOLE and lets examine it.  What you see as a whole is easily solved when you realize John used parentheses. 

It is impossible for the two witnesses to show up just 3.5 days before the midpoint, and testify for 1260 days INSIDE that 3.5 days. Your answer is to back there appearance up to the beginning of the week. You seem to think that is easy: just MOVE them. I cannot because I KNOW they show up right where John mentions them. I will not rearrange the book to fit a theory. You seem to find that easy.  I think the answer is obvious: John wrote some of the monolog about them in a parenthesis that is outside of his chronolog.  

Along this line, do you see Rev. 14 in John's timeline as after the 42 months of authority? 

One day you will apologize, for it is written in concrete - so to speak: I heard from the head of the church: the 70th week is marked with 7's.   You think I did not hear from the head of the church because what He taught me does not fit your theories. It is as simple as that.  OF COURSE you would never consider that it is your theory that is off. That would NEVER happen. Well, my friend, one day it WILL happen. 

Sorry, my friend, but the holes are on your side. Look: it is SO SIMPLE: just put in the parenthesis marks that John used when He wrote. He did not have any marks to us. You do. 

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

This fallacy goes both ways, one to over simplification, the other to over complexification of causality.  Time I time again I have cautioned people to quit staring at one tree, back up a few hundred paces and see the entire forest. In my opinion, you make Revelation FAR more complicated than John did. 

If you look at a picture upside down, it is complicated.... I am trying to get you to flip the picture over. A tree in the forest is a perfect analogy. You are looking at the myriad of branches, but are not seeing the trunk of the tree, that Myriad of branches have a certain order to them, but until you start at the trunk and follow your way up Then you will see how the tree is put together.

Parenthesis are a figment of your imagination. My framework has no need of parenthesis, But of course you are unable to even process that because you see any interaction as an attack against your theories instead of considering what is being said and walking in another man's shoes. This is a Character flaw of a teacher who is unable to be taught. Do you understand why this is so important? Because it is the same mindset the Pharisees had. 

3 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Along this line, do you see Rev. 14 in John's timeline as after the 42 months of authority? 

I see Rev. 14 as after the first half of the week, after the Beast has ruled for 42 months. 

21 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

One day you will apologize, for it is written in concrete - so to speak: I heard from the head of the church: the 70th week is marked with 7's.   You think I did not hear from the head of the church because what He taught me does not fit your theories. It is as simple as that.  OF COURSE you would never consider that it is your theory that is off. That would NEVER happen. Well, my friend, one day it WILL happen. 

This assessment has nothing to do with fitting my theory, and everything to do with the errors in your theory. It is such an obvious and blatant error. The death of the two witnesses marks the end of the second Woe. 

21 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Sorry, my friend, but the holes are on your side. Look: it is SO SIMPLE: just put in the parenthesis marks that John used when He wrote. He did not have any marks to us. You do. 

Why do I oppose parenthesis? Because there is no rule for placing them in the text. Depending on your presumed and assumed timeline of events you can place them anywhere, as others and yourself have done. It is a way for people such as yourself to elevate themselves as dictators and teachers and tell the less informed where they should place the parenthesis at (A form of Nicolaitanism as defined by the word). What I am proposing requires no (Zero) parenthesis to be placed in the text and thus obedience to the rule laid out by John NOT to add to Prophecy of this book. Do You understand this? I take John's warning seriously.   

[iamlamad]

11 hours ago, dhchristian said:

If you look at a picture upside down, it is complicated.... I am trying to get you to flip the picture over. A tree in the forest is a perfect analogy. You are looking at the myriad of branches, but are not seeing the trunk of the tree, that Myriad of branches have a certain order to them, but until you start at the trunk and follow your way up Then you will see how the tree is put together.

Parenthesis are a figment of your imagination. My framework has no need of parenthesis, But of course you are unable to even process that because you see any interaction as an attack against your theories instead of considering what is being said and walking in another man's shoes. This is a Character flaw of a teacher who is unable to be taught. Do you understand why this is so important? Because it is the same mindset the Pharisees had. 

I see Rev. 14 as after the first half of the week, after the Beast has ruled for 42 months. 

This assessment has nothing to do with fitting my theory, and everything to do with the errors in your theory. It is such an obvious and blatant error. The death of the two witnesses marks the end of the second Woe. 

Why do I oppose parenthesis? Because there is no rule for placing them in the text. Depending on your presumed and assumed timeline of events you can place them anywhere, as others and yourself have done. It is a way for people such as yourself to elevate themselves as dictators and teachers and tell the less informed where they should place the parenthesis at (A form of Nicolaitanism as defined by the word). What I am proposing requires no (Zero) parenthesis to be placed in the text and thus obedience to the rule laid out by John NOT to add to Prophecy of this book. Do You understand this? I take John's warning seriously.   

Sorry, but your "framework" requires far too much imagination. I have to take Revelation as written. In this case the "trunk" is the intent of the Author in chapters 4 & 5 where God begins to show John things to come. What most people miss is that God starts before Christ rose from the dead.  You simply don't understand that Jesus Christ, the head of the church taught me, and you are trying to teach me something different.  When I had the very BEST teacher, all others are lacking. The Author always knows His intended meaning. 

What you are saying tells me you don't believe in parentheses. I use them frequently when I write. So you see chapter 14 as after the Beast's 42 months? So you see the Beast's 42 months ended in the last verse of chapter 13.  What you are saying then, is that Jesus gives His warning not to take the mark AFTER THE FACT - after untold millions have received the mark and doomed themselves to and eternity in fire.  If you would just take John's text AS WRITTEN, you would know that in chapter 13, God just shows John what the Beast WILL DO, but does it with a parenthesis, so it is outside of his chronology. If you don't like parenthesis, then take it as prophecy, looking forward in time to when these things WILL happen.

If you knew when the week really ends - at the 7th vial - you would know that the 42 months of trampling must go to the 7th vial; the 1260 days of testifying (plus 3.5 days of laying dead) goes to the 7th vial; the 1260 days of fleeing goes to the 7th vial, the 3.5 years of supernatural feeding and protection goes to the 7th vial, and the 42 months of authority goes to chapter 19, when Jesus captures the Beast.  It seems you see individual trees but cannot understand the forest. 

Again I want to remind you of Jesus' words: "every time I mentioned an event that would start at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, I always included the 3 1/2 year period of time. When you find the mentions of the 3 1/2 year period of time, you will be very close to the exact midpoint."

Now, what does this tell us?  First, it tells us there is an ENTIRE 70th week in our future. Some people imagine that the first half was in Jesus' days.  Next, it tells us that EVERY ONE of the mentions of the 3 1/2 years, whether in days, months or times, all begin at or near the midpoint and go to the end of the week.  Since we have these 5 mentions of that period of time in chapters 11 through 13, then all three of these chapters are MIDPOINT chapters.  If chapter 13 is a midpoint chapter, we we should not expect chapter 14 or 15 to be the end. 

Next, His words show us that the chapters BEFORE chapter 11 are in the first half of the week.  Next, they show us that John does have some kind of chronology since three chapters in the middle of the book are midpoint chapters in the week. 

Finally, His words show us your theory that the two witnesses testify in the first half of the week is completely bogus.  (If one already knew that the week begins at the 7th seal in chapter 8, and John does not see the two witnesses until chapter 11, one could figure out without Jesus' words to me that the two witnesses show up around the midpoint, not the beginning of the week. )

By the way, I am showing you holes in your framework.

This is a Character flaw of a teacher who is unable to be taught.  You keep saying this or things like it, but it is not what is happening at all. The truth is, I can easily recognize a counterfeit to the truth of these scriptures. I am taught by the best. If there is a flaw anywhere, it is that you cannot see the holes in your own theory. Let me say this as plainly as I know how: I am not going to swallow fallacies and myths - taught as if they were truth.  This goes on in so many churches across the land: each pastor imagining what he is teaching on the end times is 100% truth. And the people listening, not knowing any better, receive it as truth. 

Here is truth: the days of GT Jesus spoke of comes AFTER the abomination. You know this. What you miss is that it is the abomination that DIVIDES the week.  But since one error leads to another, you don't read Daniel 9:27 as dividing in half, so that error has led to many more. From Strong's, that word, "chetsiy," is used in the KJV 3915 times as "the middle of the night " ("half") - the point in time that divides the darkness into two halves. (Can we trust Strong's?)  It comes from the root "Chatsah" which Strong's tells us means "to divide, cut in two, cut short, live half (of one's life)."

Anyone should know the real meaning intended is to divide in half - for the simple reason that God has given us the half week 7 times, and in three different ways, PROVING some event cut the week into two equal halves.  I have been giving you chance after chance to see the holes in your theory - but you have not. Neither do I expect it. I can only hope. 

Make no mistake here: Daniel 9:27 tells us that SOME EVENT will divide the week into two halves. Daniel then mentions the "time, times, and half of time" twice to back up that meaning in verse 27, and John adds 5 more to prove without any doubt the week gets divided into two halves.  The question is, WHAT EVENT will divide the week? Daniel tells us it will be an event that will stop the daily sacrifices. (As of now, the daily sacrifices have not yet started - but according to Daniel, they will.)

If we look at daniel 8, we get an example of an event that would stop the daily sacrifices. Daniel tells us that Antiochus entered the temple, and set up an image of HIS GOD (Zeus) in the Holy of Holies - and the daily sacrifices ceased. We can expect then, this very same kind of an event; in fact, Paul tells us the man of sin will enter the temple, enter the Holy of Holies, and declare HE is God. My friend, this event is what is going to stop the daily sacrifices as Daniel 9:27 tells us, and this event will divide the week into two halves. This event then is what Jesus spoke of as the abomination of desolation. Jesus could have gotten that from Daniel 9:27 or from Daniel 11 or Daniel 12.

The death of the two witnesses marks the end of the second Woe.   This is just one more hole in a theory. John makes a statement of fact that the second woe had already started and then ended some time in the past. If we just study to show ourselves approved, anyone can show that the 2nd woe ended in chapter 9.  In other words, in verse 14 John changes subjects. It is only imagination that would tie verse 14 to the previous verses. 

Because there is no rule for placing them in the text.   Most good readers can discover parentheses without the marks. Example:

Rev. 4:...they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5  But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

It seems some people have been out of school too long and have forgotten, so a short English lesson is needed. "THIS" from "this is the first resurrection" is a PRONOUN. A pronoun takes the place of a noun previously used (the antecedent). To find out what a pronoun is referring to, we must BACK UP. ("Ante" means before.)  You have stated over and over that John did not use parentheses. If we back up from "this" to find the first noun referencing a resurrection, we come to  "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished." Therefore, John's meaning MUST BE that the resurrection of the damned that comes after the 1000 years is the resurrection called "the first resurrection." But IS THIS JOHN'S MEANING? Of course it is not!  How then can we solve this? 

Rev. 4:...they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (5  But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.) This is the first resurrection.  Problem solved. Now to find the antecedent, one must jump over the words in parenthesis and look back to "They lived and reigned with Christ ..."    It is clear that john used a parenthesis here, but had no marks or punctuation to show it. 

This shows us one more hole in your theory.  The two witnesses SHOW UP or appear just before the midpoint. Without a parenthesis, one must rearrange Revelation and put their first appearance back in chapter 8 OR discover that John used a parenthesis so that their time of testifying is really in the last half where Jesus told me it should be. 

I assume you imagine that rearranging is different than adding to or subtracting from. Next, you fail to take into your consideration that ALL punctuation has been added, plus verse numbers and chapters. Did those that "added" punctuation and verses and chapters disobey John's warning? Think about it! 

Edited November 20, 2019 by iamlamad

[dhchristian]

Just now, iamlamad said:

You simply don't understand that Jesus Christ, the head of the church taught me, and you are trying to teach me something different.  When I had the very BEST teacher, all others are lacking. The Author always knows His intended meaning. 

This is a presumption on your part, one that leads you to ignorance and inability to be taught. This is not how the Holy Ghost teaches us He does not dictate he leads. This goes back to our discussion on the Holy Ghost, and HIS character. As a Pentecostal you were taught to seek the experience only, not the discernment. There are false spirits out there that can duplicate the experience and lead you to error.

 

2 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

What you are saying tells me you don't believe in parentheses. I use them frequently when I write. So you see chapter 14 as after the Beast's 42 months? So you see the Beast's 42 months ended in the last verse of chapter 13.  What you are saying then, is that Jesus gives His warning not to take the mark AFTER THE FACT - after untold millions have received the mark and doomed themselves to and eternity in fire.  If you would just take John's text AS WRITTEN, you would know that in chapter 13, God just shows John what the Beast WILL DO, but does it with a parenthesis, so it is outside of his chronology. If you don't like parenthesis, then take it as prophecy, looking forward in time to when these things WILL happen.

I Actually anticipated this response from you. Here is what the scripture says: Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. (14:7)

What the message of the three angels is, is the pronouncement of judgment. These events are synonymous with the the sixth seal and the sixth trumpet. Right after the two witnesses are killed. We see in these messages one last call to repentance, the destruction of the beasts Kingdom and judgment on those who receive the mark of the beast. Refer back to my original post, and you will see that Rev.  14 is the end of the characters vision, and Rev. 15 begins another vision. Rev 14 ends at the winepress of God's wrath which is the final battle (Armageddon), those who are not harvested as wheat are sent into the wrath of God.

So you see the Beast's 42 months ended in the last verse of chapter 13.  It does within days of the pronouncement. We see this again in 18:2 about fallen, fallen Babylon, pointing to the same event, Again, My timeline has no problem with this. In !8:2 this fall shows the fall of the religious element of the beast Kingdom (mystery Babylon). You have the Both the kingdom of the beast and the religion of the beast fall. And who carries out this destruction? The fourth beast of revelation...These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. (17:16-17)

Here is another mistake in your understanding. Would the Beast of Rev. 13 really hate the false prophet and want to kill the religion that worships him? Pretty self destructive if you ask me, But another beast, and ten kings empowered for one hour would do so. Again, Though My theory begins with the simple, it has an understanding that requires no parenthesis, yet is complex and three dimensional building off of the foundational structure of 2+2=4. 

36 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

This is a Character flaw of a teacher who is unable to be taught.  You keep saying this or things like it, but it is not what is happening at all. The truth is, I can easily recognize a counterfeit to the truth of these scriptures. I am taught by the best. If there is a flaw anywhere, it is that you cannot see the holes in your own theory. Let me say this as plainly as I know how: I am not going to swallow fallacies and myths - taught as if they were truth.  This goes on in so many churches across the land: each pastor imagining what he is teaching on the end times is 100% truth. And the people listening, not knowing any better, receive it as truth. 

The Truth is that you do not recognize that your faith is in your own understanding and imagination, and you have made this your god. I amnot trying to get you to follow my theory or to dictate what you should believe, I am trying to get you to see and admit that you are wrong. You are using Jesus as an excuse not to correct yourself, this is known as denial. You have been taught some amazing things by the Holy Ghost, I will attest to that but your faith is still in your own carnal mind and imagination which interprets what you are shown to its own ends. This is the same thing that Balaam did. He was shown the truth and he pronounced the truth, but used his carnal mind to come up with a scheme to his own gain. That gain for you is putting yourself on the pedestal of a teacher who can look down others and dictate to them what they should believe. This by definition is Nicolaitanism. I am trying to get you to see this more so than accept my timeline. I Know the timeline will sort itself out in the end. Think of me as the talking donkey is if that makes you feel better.

47 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Here is truth: the days of GT Jesus spoke of comes AFTER the abomination. You know this. What you miss is that it is the abomination that DIVIDES the week.  But since one error leads to another, you don't read Daniel 9:27 as dividing in half, so that error has led to many more. From Strong's, that word, "chetsiy," is used in the KJV 3915 times as "the middle of the night " ("half") - the point in time that divides the darkness into two halves. (Can we trust Strong's?)  It comes from the root "Chatsah" which Strong's tells us means "to divide, cut in two, cut short, live half (of one's life)."

been over this with you already, midst of can be translated as half the week, as many versions do, both are grammatically correct, one is scripturally correct. Jesus places the abomination at the beginning of the end so I trust his words on this. Other scriptures such a s 2 thess. 2 verify this that the man of sin declares himself God thus revealing himself to be the Antichrist "first" Irregardless of whether you interpret the falling away as the departing. The first event is the AoD. As for Antiochus he declared himself god first at the start of the 2300 days hence he was nicknamed Ephimanes which means lunatic. Declaring yourself God is the abomination and is the reason why the Jews were so quick to Stone Christ when he said "before Abraham was, I Am". 

56 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Most good readers can discover parentheses without the marks.

So You need a teacher to tell them how to be good readers and where to put the marks... Do you see the Nicolaitanism in this concept? You then proceed to show the "rules" of placing parenthesis in the text, which is adding to the Words of the book "private interpretation" which John condemns as does Peter. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20) Point being, Even amongst you that promote parenthesis, there is confusion as to where to place them and there is a constant power struggle to see who is smarter.

Sadly you do this unconscious that you are doing this. What I am showing here is a simple framework with which anyone can approach prophecy with and gain understanding By the teaching of the Holy Ghost into the complexity therein. it is as simple as the birthing process, Pain followed by great pain followed by Joy.... Yet the process of Birth is astoundingly complex on a biological level. What Nicolaitanism does is make the process overly complex so that the common man would have to get an expert to explain it to them, this is how these teachers prophesy for gain. We are seeing them all over on the internet now selling their products and flaunting their status on the pedestal of pride, claiming authority because of the number of years they have studied this etc. They view themselves not as brethren, but as superiors ruling over the laity.

To any out there who read this, The Only teacher you need to understand Revelation is the Holy Ghost along with a basic framework of the birthing process. 

 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. (Matthew 23:5-11)

[iamlamad]

2 hours ago, dhchristian said:

This is a presumption on your part, one that leads you to ignorance and inability to be taught. This is not how the Holy Ghost teaches us He does not dictate he leads. This goes back to our discussion on the Holy Ghost, and HIS character. As a Pentecostal you were taught to seek the experience only, not the discernment. There are false spirits out there that can duplicate the experience and lead you to error.

DH, How can one presume when God speaks and the one spoken to is suddenly "in the Spirit" and cannot respond?  No one can "presume" such an experience.  You imagine it to be presumption because you have no other way to answer words directly from Jesus except to change your theory or deny I heard from Jesus. As a Pentecostal you were taught to seek the experience only, not the discernment. This is presumption on your part. I agree there are false spirits. But have you not read?  "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me..."  I learned long ago to recognize HIS voice and to distinguish it from the voice of my own spirit.

I understand that the words I have written, words that Jesus spoke to me, force you to either blame the words, or change your theory.  it is obvious which you have done and continue to do.

I will add; WORDS are far more powerful that "impressions" that can be imagined. Many people that say "God said" only get "impressions." Just look at the many different denominations we have today - many thinking they alone have the truth. How did they start? I would say by people imagining they heard from God. Others may actually hear words in the realm of the spirit. Our spirit man can hear things we cannot. But then, how does the hearing get from the human spirit to the brain where it can be accessed? Some hear their human spirit and imagine it is God speaking. 

Next, the words Jesus said line up perfectly with the WRITTEN word.  Where then does that leave your theory?

Edited November 20, 2019 by iamlamad

[iamlamad]

2 hours ago, dhchristian said:

  4 hours ago, iamlamad said:

... So you see chapter 14 as after the Beast's 42 months? So you see the Beast's 42 months ended in the last verse of chapter 13.  What you are saying then, is that Jesus gives His warning not to take the mark AFTER THE FACT - after untold millions have received the mark and doomed themselves to and eternity in fire.  If you would just take John's text AS WRITTEN, you would know that in chapter 13, God just shows John what the Beast WILL DO, but does it with a parenthesis, so it is outside of his chronology. If you don't like parenthesis, then take it as prophecy, looking forward in time to when these things WILL happen.

I Actually anticipated this response from you. Here is what the scripture says: Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. (14:7)

What the message of the three angels is, is the pronouncement of judgment. These events are synonymous with the the sixth seal and the sixth trumpet. Right after the two witnesses are killed. We see in these messages one last call to repentance, the destruction of the beasts Kingdom and judgment on those who receive the mark of the beast. Refer back to my original post, and you will see that Rev.  14 is the end of the characters vision, and Rev. 15 begins another vision. Rev 14 ends at the winepress of God's wrath which is the final battle (Armageddon), those who are not harvested as wheat are sent into the wrath of God.

So you see the Beast's 42 months ended in the last verse of chapter 13.  It does within days of the pronouncement. We see this again in 18:2 about fallen, fallen Babylon, pointing to the same event, Again, My timeline has no problem with this. In !8:2 this fall shows the fall of the religious element of the beast Kingdom (mystery Babylon). You have the Both the kingdom of the beast and the religion of the beast fall. And who carries out this destruction? The fourth beast of revelation...These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. (17:16-17)

How interesting you quoted the angel telling people to worship God, while I was talking about the 3rd angel's message about the danger of taking the mark and being doomed to fire and brimstone forever.  I would say that was a nice sidestep on your part but still leaves your theory in a quandary: God gives the warning not to take the mark AFTER the days of GT are finished. 

Did you notice that "is come" is a Greek Aorist verb? Here is Strong's definition: "Is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without regard for past, present, or future time. There is no direct or clear English equivalent for this tense..."  In other words, in English all we can tell is that judgment started previous to this time, is happening now, or will begin. We can tell, by studying the entire book, and judgment started at the 6th seal  with the start of the DAY.

If you understand that this is just a short while after the midpoint of the week, and this is INSIDE The Day of the Lord, that the abomination just happened, John just saw the beast arise (he was just revealed to the world as the Beast when he pronounced he was God) the church age is gone, and it is the Day of the Lord and Daniel's 70th week, what God requires now, in this time, is just to fear and worship God as the creator of the universe. Notice there is nothing about having faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus - nothing about believing Jesus is their Messiah.  Now look at the third angel's message:

⁹ And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

¹⁰ The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

And the HUGE hole in your theory: this warning comes after the days of GT have finished! 

Let's notice what John wrote next:

¹² Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

¹³ And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

Rev. 15:2  And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God.

John is talking about those who REFUSE the image and the mark and lose their head. It is going to take patience and faith.  Notice too: John puts this in the future from chapter 14: "blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth..."  This is what I have been trying to tell you all along: chapter 14 is really BEFORE the image and mark have been created, and God's warning comes before, not after as in your theory. 

These events are synonymous with the the sixth seal and the sixth trumpet.  For the readers: notice closely DH's use of "synonymous" meaning the 6th trumpet is at the same time as the 6th seal. What he is suggesting is simply impossible. The trumpets are written INSIDE the book, and the book cannot be opened until all the seals are opened first, exactly as John as written it: the 6th seal near the end of chapter 6, and the 7th trumpet much later in chapter 7. The truth here is, NO trumpet can be at the same time as ANY seal. This theory will be proven wrong for the simple fact it is ignoring chronology and is rearranging what John wrote. 

Right after the two witnesses are killed.  Wow.  Now you have the 6th seal and the 7th trumpet - both - after the two witnesses are killed. I will overlook the 6th seal for now, and notice that if the two witnesses are killed just before the 7th trumpet Then they testify for only 3.5 days instead of their 1260. (because they really appear just 3.5 days before the 7th trumpet.) Oh, you get around this by rearranging yet again, and imagining they appear and begin testifying back at the beginning of the week - which would be synonymous with the 7th seal / first trumpet. 

This is very strange: why would John show their appearance in chapter 11  - a midpoint chapter - when they really appeared back with the first trumpet? I say he wouldn't. It seems this theory has a lot of holes.  I wonder, DH, can you find one more example in Revelation of John mentioning an event long after the fact?  It seems, all through the book, that John mentions things at the very time they happen, except for prophecy - what is about to happen but not right now. 

Rev.  14 is the end of the characters vision, and Rev. 15 begins another vision.   Sorry, but I don't believe this either.  Chapter 14, if anything, is an intermission chapter - one that RM would put in parenthesis. There are no seals, trumpets, or vials taking place here. But if it is an intermission chapter, then John is out of the intermission in chapter 15. If it is not an intermission or parenthesis, there is still no indication that Revelation 15 is a new vision. He starts chapter 15 with "AND I saw..." tying it to chapter 14. He starts chapter 14 with "AND I looked..." tying it back to chapter 13. Chapter 13 starts "AND I stood..." tying it back to chapter 12. Chapter 12 starts with "and there appeared..." tying it to chapter 11. Chapter 11 stars out "AND there was given...." tying it to chapter 10.  It goes on an on. It is very difficult then to say it is a new vision anywhere in these chapters. It goes all the way back to chapter 7 where John starts "and after these things..." One might say this was a new vision, but there is really no proof. 

I think one could easily say that at the end of chapter 14, the days of GT begin. The warning has been given, and the beheaded begin to show up in heaven in chapter 15. This fits perfectly with the Beast being revealed, rising up out of the sea, the False Prophet showing up later, they get an image built and create the mark; MEANWHILE God is giving the warnings in chapter 14. If you are so determined to rearrange, one might suggest that chapter 14 is taking place as the events of chapter 13 are happening; AS the Beast and False Prophet is gearing up for enforcing the mark, God is giving the warning. 

I really see VERY LITTLE time between the verse giving the Beast 42 months of authority, and God's warning in chapter 14.  Just a comment: if two things are happening at the same time, John must write of them one at a time.

Rev 14 ends at the winepress of God's wrath which is the final battle (Armageddon)  I wonder: how do you explain that Armageddon really takes place in chapter 19 when Jesus returns?   You will probably say, "My timeline has no problem with this.." 

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Here is another mistake in your understanding. Would the Beast of Rev. 13 really hate the false prophet and want to kill the religion that worships him? Pretty self destructive if you ask me, But another beast, and ten kings empowered for one hour would do so. Again, Though My theory begins with the simple, it has an understanding that requires no parenthesis, yet is complex and three dimensional building off of the foundational structure of 2+2=4. 

You are only showing that you don't understand "Babylon the great." John and the Holy Spirit are talking about the city of Jerusalem! Yes, they USE that city for most of their 42 months, but they HATE the Jews and they HATE the city and they HATE the entire nation. You get one small part right: the religion of the Beast is that they worship HIM - the Beast -  as God. He will deceive the Muslims into thinking he is their ALLAH and 12th Imam rolled into one. He will deceive those Jews that get deceived into thinking he is their long awaited messiah. He is going to deceive ALL the false religions of the world: they all will begin worshipping him as God. The ten kings throw in with the BEAST to wipe Israel off the map, not destroy his religion. I am convinced that is what he tells the ten kings. I don't think they have a clue that they are going to fight GOD HIMSELF. 

[dhchristian]

5 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

DH, How can one presume when God speaks and the one spoken to is suddenly "in the Spirit" and cannot respond?  No one can "presume" such an experience.  You imagine it to be presumption because you have no other way to answer words directly from Jesus except to change your theory or deny I heard from Jesus. As a Pentecostal you were taught to seek the experience only, not the discernment. This is presumption on your part. I agree there are false spirits. But have you not read?  "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me..."  I learned long ago to recognize HIS voice and to distinguish it from the voice of my own spirit.

I understand that the words I have written, words that Jesus spoke to me, force you to either blame the words, or change your theory.  it is obvious which you have done and continue to do.

I will add; WORDS are far more powerful that "impressions" that can be imagined. Many people that say "God said" only get "impressions." Just look at the many different denominations we have today - many thinking they alone have the truth. How did they start? I would say by people imagining they heard from God. Others may actually hear words in the realm of the spirit. Our spirit man can hear things we cannot. But then, how does the hearing get from the human spirit to the brain where it can be accessed? Some hear their human spirit and imagine it is God speaking. 

Next, the words Jesus said line up perfectly with the WRITTEN word.  Where then does that leave your theory?

Look, I am neither denying, nor discrediting what you say you heard from Him. I am saying how you processed those words are in error. What He Told me and showed me is very similar to what you claim. He showed me the Day of the Lord is marked by sevens (Not in those words) Then he proceeded to show me a painting being painted. I did not understand this fully, and I am still figuring the nuances out but I know a painting begins by painting the background with Broad strokes, and then details are filled in. So when I first was given this I tried to process all this with the presumed timeline I was taught by well meaning teachers (Dispensationalist, Pre tribbers, primarily) Many of whom I still respect and listen to this day, But I had to throw all these preconceived ideas away before He could begin to teach me. I Had no pet doctrines that i was holding to I Just wanted to Know the truth, Where he lead I would follow. Where I see you at is that you have yet to do this and start again. Instead you are trying to make the revelation fit your understanding and timeline. You cannot do this and learn the Whole Truth from Him. Those preconceptions will always lead you back to original timeline. It's called circular reasoning.