The First Seal and the Horseman on the White Horse

[not an echo]

On 3/26/2021 at 2:01 PM, not an echo said:

On 3/23/2021 at 4:22 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/22/2021 at 9:13 PM, not an echo said:

Now Diaste, I wager that you know right well that I would agree wholeheartedly with your statement .  Our goal must be to deal with it, or interpret it so that our understanding is in harmony with all of Scripture.  And, while you may not like my song, I submit that it is in tune with Scripture---and a lot better tune than some other songs I've heard.  I was thinking of saying a tiny something more, but our Father said enough is enough.  I will wager once more that you know right well what I was thinking...

I try not to assume what another person means until they explain. I was on the other side of that for many years and let me tell you it's emotionally draining. I still fight the residue of that after many years. I try my best not to do it to others.

I'm not playing a game or pretending, I promise.

Hey Diaste,

In all seriousness, I do take you seriously.  I know that you believe what you believe with conviction and that you have reasons for believing what you believe, like me, that go way beyond what it is possible to convey in a few posts, even many.  As you said to me a little bit back, I feel ya bro. 

And, I haven't minded too bad when you have come hard at something I have put forth.  On my end, if my interpretations are in error, blow the smithereens out of'em.  There's already enough error out there.  I have no desire to add any more.  I would as soon God strike me dead.  Often my prayer has gone like this:  "Father, if there is something that I need to see that I'm not seeing, do whatever You have to do to get me to see it.  I know You have my best interest and what is best at heart."  I would encourage anyone to pray in this manner.  I seek to serve Christ and His Kingdom purposes, not mine.  I want to believe the same about you Diaste.  As far as our discussions, some just engage my thought processes more than others.  You are one of the some.

Got to go, I'm about late for my bus route...

Hey again Diaste, 

At the time I had to leave for my bus route the other day, I didn't have time to really reflect on my reply to you as I would have liked.  You had indicated something with these words---"I try not to assume what another person means until they explain"---that I had aimed to clarify for you, but I failed to.

When I said this...

"And, while you may not like my song, I submit that it is in tune with Scripture---and a lot better tune than some other songs I've heard.  I was thinking of saying a tiny something more, but our Father said enough is enough.  I will wager once more that you know right well what I was thinking..."

...what I was meaning was just a little humorous something, to the effect that I feel my song is in tune with Scripture---and a lot better tune than some other songs I've heard---even yours!  What's in bold is that "little something more" that I was alluding too.  I said what I said from the perspective of feeling that you no doubt feel the same about your song.

I have always been prayerful about my replies and mindful of the importance of replying with Christian charity (I Cor. 13).  When I add the little emojis, please don't think that I am playing games or anything.  It is just an effort to keep things on a loving family of God level...and I do like humor and to carry on some. 

As I believe I told you once upon a time, one of these days when you're standing by the Crystal River (Rev. 22:1), I'm gonna sneak up behind you and give you a good shove...

Edited February 1, 2023 by not an echo

[not an echo]

On 3/24/2021 at 3:28 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/22/2021 at 8:23 PM, not an echo said:

This being the case, the fulfillment of Daniel's 70th Week could certainly be seen as being part of the "all these things" (Matt. 24:33) as well.  Just saying...  

Yes. And nothing prohibits 'all these things' from including the birth pangs. In truth it looks to me like the Olivet Discourse is a seamless comprehensive treatise on the end of the age and it's fulfillment at the existence of the terminal generation.

It seems to me that your understanding essentially reduces the Olivet Discourse to a prophecy of non-relevance for Christians of the past 2000 some odd years.

I think of Luke's account of the opening words of Jesus' Olivet Discourse, as recorded in chapter 21:

 8  And He said, Take heed that ye be not deceived:  for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ;  AND THE TIME DRAWETH NEAR:  go ye not therefore after them.

I know, I know.  Did Jesus mean this, or did He mean something else?

I think of the opening verses of The Revelation, as recorded in chapter 1:

 1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to shew unto His servants THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS;  and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John:

 2  Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

 3  BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, AND THEY THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY, AND KEEP THOSE THINGS THAT ARE WRITTEN THEREIN:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did what John record mean this, of did it mean something else?

I think of the last chapter of The Bible and what we find recorded there, in chapter 22:

 10  And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did the angel mean this, or did he mean something else?

In accord with what God's Word bears out and the history of God's World bears out, if any of the above means anything else (than what has been realized), it means this---what the above was written concerning was about to BEGIN for New Testament children of God.  AND IT DID!

Further, what the above was written concerning has not been something that has been fulfilled, but rather, it has been BEING fulfilled, and this will continue to be so, until it is fully fulfilled.

For me, when I began to understand things this way, all the prophetic puzzle pieces began to come together in a remarkable way.  And so far, in my experience of sharing and explaining my understanding on this forum, my understanding has only been further confirmed, IMHO.

[DeighAnn]

12 minutes ago, not an echo said:

It seems to me that your understanding essentially reduces the Olivet Discourse to a prophecy of non-relevance for Christians of the past 2000 some odd years.

I think of Luke's account of the opening words of Jesus' Olivet Discourse, as recorded in chapter 21:

 8  And He said, Take heed that ye be not deceived:  for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ;  AND THE TIME DRAWETH NEAR:  go ye not therefore after them.

I know, I know.  Did Jesus mean this, or did He mean something else?

I think of the opening verses of The Revelation, as recorded in chapter 1:

 1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to shew unto His servants THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS;  and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John:

 2  Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

 3  BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, AND THEY THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY, AND KEEP THOSE THINGS THAT ARE WRITTEN THEREIN:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did what John record mean this, of did it mean something else?

I think of the last chapter of The Bible and what we find recorded there, in chapter 22:

 10  And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did the angel mean this, or did he mean something else?

In accord with what God's Word bears out and the history of God's World bears out, if any of the above means anything else (than what has been realized), it means this---what the above was written concerning was about to BEGIN for New Testament children of God.  AND IT DID!

Further, what the above was written concerning has not been something that has been fulfilled, but rather, it has been BEING fulfilled, and this will continue to be so, until it is fully fulfilled.

For me, when I began to understand things this way, all the prophetic puzzle pieces began to come together in a remarkable way.  And so far, in my experience of sharing and explaining my understanding on this forum, my understanding has only been further confirmed, IMHO.

Wouldn't it have to be taught to everyone on down the generations as if it was happening to them so that when it finally got to the last generation, it was taught correctly?  And it seems to me that it kept everyone on their toes anyhow.  Thoughts?

[Diaste]

5 hours ago, not an echo said:

It seems to me that your understanding essentially reduces the Olivet Discourse to a prophecy of non-relevance for Christians of the past 2000 some odd years.

I think of Luke's account of the opening words of Jesus' Olivet Discourse, as recorded in chapter 21:

 8  And He said, Take heed that ye be not deceived:  for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ;  AND THE TIME DRAWETH NEAR:  go ye not therefore after them.

I don't think that at all. I'm saying it's not the fulfillment of the parallel prophecies of Daniel, Joel, Zech, Matt, Mark, Luke and Revelation concerning the end of the age. I can't place specific prophecies about a specific time in some other context, especially when the conditions in question existed for 2000+ years before the prophecies were given.

There have always been wars, famines, plagues, earthquakes, persecution and floods and that well before Jesus spoke to the four on the Mount of Olives. So then Jesus would not be a prophet but a historian. Since we know He is a prophet He is speaking to something more specific than geopolitical and temporal conditions that preexisted His time on earth.

 

5 hours ago, not an echo said:

I know, I know.  Did Jesus mean this, or did He mean something else?

I think of the opening verses of The Revelation, as recorded in chapter 1:

 1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to shew unto His servants THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS;  and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John:

 2  Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

 3  BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, AND THEY THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY, AND KEEP THOSE THINGS THAT ARE WRITTEN THEREIN:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did what John record mean this, of did it mean something else?

I'm pretty sure I said this before but a close look at the ideas of the words for 'at hand' and 'shortly come to pass' are not the same as we define it today. And if  'at hand' meant NOW and 'shortly come to pass' meant 'soon' then why did only some of Revelation come to pass? Why did 5 seals take 1988 years to unroll effects but 2 waited nearly 2000 years? That's not 'soon' or 'now'.

5 hours ago, not an echo said:

I think of the last chapter of The Bible and what we find recorded there, in chapter 22:

 10  And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did the angel mean this, or did he mean something else?

So if we are to interpret this as 'now' then you have to do the same with the other instances where 'eggus' occurs; Matt 24:33 for example. So where is Jesus? It's been 1988 years. So he is near? Right at the door? According to you those things have been happening. 

5 hours ago, not an echo said:

In accord with what God's Word bears out and the history of God's World bears out, if any of the above means anything else (than what has been realized), it means this---what the above was written concerning was about to BEGIN for New Testament children of God.  AND IT DID!

Further, what the above was written concerning has not been something that has been fulfilled, but rather, it has been BEING fulfilled, and this will continue to be so, until it is fully fulfilled.

For me, when I began to understand things this way, all the prophetic puzzle pieces began to come together in a remarkable way.  And so far, in my experience of sharing and explaining my understanding on this forum, my understanding has only been further confirmed, IMHO.

It seems odd to me that the prophecies can be split apart willy nilly. Some of it has been happening the rest has not. Five seals and a portion of the Olivet Discourse are not only near but fulfilled in millennia of existing conditions but the rest, not so much. Where is the justification in scripture for this?

[Diaste]

On 3/28/2021 at 7:34 PM, not an echo said:

Hey again Diaste, 

At the time I had to leave for my bus route the other day, I didn't have time to really reflect on my reply to you as I would have liked.  You had indicated something with these words---"I try not to assume what another person means until they explain"---that I had aimed to clarify for you, but I failed to.

When I said this...

"And, while you may not like my song, I submit that it is in tune with Scripture---and a lot better tune than some other songs I've heard.  I was thinking of saying a tiny something more, but our Father said enough is enough.  I will wager once more that you know right well what I was thinking..."

I really don't think like that. I was abused in that manner, a person thinking they knew what I meant but never asking, and seemingly not caring either. It's a shameful thing to do to others. So I honestly avoid it, consciously.

On 3/28/2021 at 7:34 PM, not an echo said:

...what I was meaning was just a little humorous something, to the effect that I feel my song is in tune with Scripture---and a lot better tune than some other songs I've heard---even yours!  What's in bold is that "little something more" that I was alluding too.  I said what I said from the perspective of feeling that you no doubt feel the same about your song.

Mine? I don't understand. I thought we were all getting the words from Jesus? 

On 3/28/2021 at 7:34 PM, not an echo said:

I have always been prayerful about my replies and mindful of the importance of replying with Christian charity (I Cor. 13).  When I add the little emojis, please don't think that I am playing games or anything.  It is just an effort to keep things on a loving family of God level...and I do like humor and to carry on some. 

As I believe I told you once upon a time, one of these days when you're standing by the Crystal River (Rev. 22:1), I'm gonna sneak up behind you and give you a good shove...

Just because a person is unswerving doesn't mean they have neither love nor compassion. And you better push hard, I'm kinda fat!

[not an echo]

On 3/24/2021 at 3:39 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/22/2021 at 12:24 PM, not an echo said:

If in my understanding, I had it all pecked up, it might be rightly said that I have attacked it "with an ice pick."  But, my understanding is very clean.  I am basically doing one thing---understanding verses 29-51 as having to do with the intersecting event of Christ's Sign Appearance.

                

As the above shows, in His Olivet Discourse, Jesus speaks concerning the Church Era, then of Daniel's 70th Week, then of the intersecting event of His Sign Appearance (and the rapture), which will come in between.  This means that those living when the rapture takes place (which may be us!) will have been living in the days that the end of the era of the Church actually converges with the time just preceding Daniel's 70th Week.  Hence, when Jesus begins to speak concerning the event of His Sign Appearance (Matt. 24:30) and makes the statement, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days" (Matt. 24:29), He can easily be referring to the days of the Church Era and the tribulation that He had spoken of in the first section of His discourse.  In accord with what I put forth in the opening post of this thread, this would be the tribulation effected by the horsemen of the first four seals.

Expand  

Except dispensationalism is a farce, replacement theology is worse than that, and the great tribulation is the effect of the A of D that is associated with the return of Jesus and the gathering. Now if it could be shown with evidence, apart from the opinion of the pulpit, that an A of D as described by Daniel in chapters 9, 11 and 12 occurred post ascension, or post 70 AD, or in any case in ancient times after Jesus walked the earth in the 1st century, then maybe I could adjust my thinking. 

Problem is the last A of D as recorded by Daniel and in Jewish history occurred in 167 BC and nothing in between then and March 2021 ergo, GT has not yet begun. Tribulation, distress, hard times, yes. But the GT associated with the A of D as described by Daniel, spoken of by Jesus in the 1s century, and associated directly with His coming? No.

Hello Diaste,

I believe when you have replied to me in the past with words like, "Except dispensationalism is a farce,"  you were convinced that I was a dispensationalist with some kind of agenda connected thereto.  I had thought that of late you were probably beginning to realize that I'm not a dispensationalist after all.  I guess I was mistaken.  I do understand that dispensationalists are big on the use of the phrase Church Age.  But, does my use of that phrase to describe this period of post-cross history of which we are a part, as it connects with what Jesus said that He was going to build, which was added to on the Day of Pentecost---and continues to be added to---make me a dispensationalist?  What part of what I just said is a farce?

You know that there was a time in my experience on this forum when I determined to no longer use the word "age" connected with the Church, because of its dispensational connotations---and mostly because of you !!!  Instead, I began to use the word "era" to denote the post-Cross period of history of which we are a part.  For some months, any use of the word "age" on this forum by me has been rare, with qualifications, and only because of its familiarity.  Moreover, the subject of dispensationalism has never succeeded in keeping my interest.  I've already said more about the subject than I intended to.  But, I guess I've said what I've said to ask this:  What terms do you think would be preferable to use when speaking of this post-cross era of which we are a part, as it connects with the institution that Christ said that He was going to build, which was added to on the Day of Pentecost---and continues to be added to?

Concerning your statement, "replacement theology is worse than that,"  I'm thinking .  Why would you saying something like that in your reply to what I've put forth?

Concerning the rest of your post, wherever did you get the idea that I was believing that there has been an A of D "post ascension, or post 70 AD"???  In strict accord with how you worded the last paragraph of your reply, I agree.

[not an echo]

On 3/24/2021 at 4:11 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/22/2021 at 12:12 PM, not an echo said:

In regard to your above post, I would just like to clarify that I agree with you concerning your statement, "That would mean no generation has yet been the generation as verses 15-31 did not happen at any time in the past 1988 years."  Have you been thinking that I was believing this has happened???

The issue lies in the separation and dividing of the Olivet discourse and what I see as a diminishing of the GT to tribulation, or hard times, to millennia of geopolitical and socio-economic conditions of followers of the Way.

The themes of dispensationalism and supersessionism are quite familiar and propose interpretations out of character of the written text. 

You may not be saying the A of D has yet happened, of course that would be foolish, but it seems to me the implications are there as you speak of 'church age' as a major tenet of your philosophy. It's not like the A of D is of any consequence to pretrib as they won't be here anyway, that's just for Jews and unbelievers.

In accord with pretrib the church must have already endured tribulation since the 1st century and the idea of the seals 1-5 in full swing is proof texting the required interpretation of end of the age philosophy of any stripe. The Church is far too pure and holy to endure more than what they have determined in their own mind is enough. Hence the early exit and the need to stretch the prophecy so thin across vast distances it no longer applies to the 'church'. 

So it appears to me there is a vast disconnect between what is written and what is proposed. I would question how and why this exists and we could hammer away at it till judgment day but it's not fruitful. 

I will continue on with my simplistic beliefs and normative understanding of the text till the cows come home. 

I keep getting the impression that there is an undercurrent with your replies to what I have put forth that connects way more with your rejection of the common pre-trib view than it does with anything that I have actually said.  I feel that it is needful for me to keep reinforcing that mine is A Totally Different Pre-Daniel's 70th Week Rapture Interpretation (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/253935-a-totally-different-pre-daniels-70th-week-rapture-interpretation/).

Whereas the common view would have the seals as being inseparable from Daniel's 70th Week, I don't see any evidence of Daniel's 70th Week until Revelation 11:1-3.  I believe Scripture and history consistently bears out (and will bear out) that the seals pertain to the post-cross era, which will continue until the NT Church is raptured.  This means that I understand all seven seals as pertaining exclusively to this era.  How in?

I understand the first four seals as being opened before the close of the first century, and the activity of the four horsemen as having continued from then even until this very day of 3/31/21.  When understood within the bounds that Scripture affords, the 5th, 6th, and 7th Seals can be opened today, 3/31/21.  If today were the day, the 5th Seal could have been opened this morning (on any given day, I see it as being open), with the cry of the martyrs appropriately replied to in accord with the narrative.  After this, the 6th Seal could be opened (even as I am now typing), and the Sign Appearance of Christ (which includes the rapture) could take place---easily.  Within the next hours, or even the next minutes, the 7th Seal could be opened as well.  There is no Scriptural bound that prohibits such a view.

As I see the Seven Sealed Book being all about the Day of the Lord, I believe an appropriate title for this book could be THE DAY OF THE LORD.  In accord with my understanding of the seals, I see the seals as representing what will take place leading up to the Day of the Lord.  When it is understood that the 7th Seal can be opened the same day as the 6th Seal, this makes the cry of those left behind in Revelation 6:17 true indeed:  "For the great day of His wrath is come;  and who shall be able to stand?"

Now, let me see if I can go a little further before having to sign off this afternoon.  There is also no Scriptural bounds that would prohibit the understanding that the first four trumpets can be sounded the same day as the Seven Sealed Book is opened.  Of course, the "third part" destruction that occurs with the sounding of these four trumpets is huge.  But, if this third part destruction is hemisphere specific---and the hemisphere is our Western Hemisphere---huge is an understatement.  If you have been able to read my other threads, I have pointed out that the geography of our Western Hemisphere represents the third part of the earth to within less than one-percent.  When you stand back and look at the possibility that both the Church and what is in our Western Hemisphere can be taken out of the picture on the same day, the prophetic implications of this are immense.  Consider:  This would mean that as the Church and what is in our Western Hemisphere were not a part of the fulfilling of the first 69 Weeks of Daniel's 70 Weeks prophecy, neither will these be a part of the 70th Week.  Talk about a STAGE RESET!

Moreover, if the only remaining population of the earth at the end of Daniel's 70th Week exists in the hemisphere of which Israel is a part, this takes all the mystery away for how that "every eye" will simultaneously behold Christ at His Second Advent.

Concerning the 5th Trumpet and part of the period of the 6th Trumpet (Rev. 9:13-21), I see these connecting with the final preparations of the stage reset for the fulfilling of Daniel's 70th Week.  As soon as the stage is fully ready, the "little book" of Daniel is seen "open" (Rev. 10 with Dan. 12:4, 8-10), and the curtain is opened to reveal the beginning of Daniel's 70th Week (Rev. 11:1-3ff).  Consider again Revelation 11:1 with Matthew 24:15 and II Thessalonians 2:3-4.

For me, this understanding is in such harmony with Scripture that it is Divine.  I mean by this, that it came from God, through the leadership of His Holy Spirit, in accord with what Jesus said to His first disciples in John 16:13, the night before He was crucified.

Show me something that is more from God Diaste...

Edited February 1, 2023 by not an echo
add link

[not an echo]

On 3/24/2021 at 2:47 PM, WilliamL said:

On 3/24/2021 at 3:39 AM, Diaste said:

an A of D as described by Daniel in chapters 9

Another popular misconception of Daniel 9. That passage actually never uses this term in the Hebrew. Here is an accurate reading. Sorry if it is too technical for some.

Note that the term "abominations" is plural. Note also that this event does not take place in the Holy Place/Sanctuary, as required by the Olivet discourse. This passage was fulfilled in detail in 70 AD.

…וְעַל/And upon/over כְּנַף/a wing/corner/border, שִׁקּוּצִים/abominable things/idols of מְשֹׁמֵם/one who destroys/a destroyer [Polel verb stem (like Piel: intensive) Active Participle ms]…

“… And upon/over a wing/corner shall be abominations/idols of a destroyer…”

Comment: All kinds of presumptions have been imposed by different translators upon this phrase. For example, עַל means “upon, over,” never “for” or “by.” (Compare what your Bible says.)

כְּנַף is a noun here; this spelling is never a verb participle, as the KJV mistranslates it (“overspreading”). It has no prefix ה/the.

שִׁקּוּצִים is plural, not singular. Although many people presume that this phraseשִׁקּוּצִים מְשֹׁמֵם/shiqqutzim məshomame is equivalent to the similar-sounding phrase שִׁקּוּץ שֹׁמֵם/shiqqutz shomame of Daniel 12:11, they are significantly different. Only the latter phrase fulfills the prophecy by Jesus about “the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet.” Matt. 24:15 Both shiqqutz and shomame are singular and lack the prefixה, so shomame can act as an attributive participle, thus as a modifier of shiqqutz: “a desolating abomination” = “an abomination of desolation.”

Hello WilliamL,

Was just wondering how you would have Daniel 9:24-27 to actually read.  Could you give us like the WLV (WilliamL Version) of it?

[not an echo]

On 3/28/2021 at 10:27 PM, DeighAnn said:

On 3/28/2021 at 10:13 PM, not an echo said:

It seems to me that your understanding essentially reduces the Olivet Discourse to a prophecy of non-relevance for Christians of the past 2000 some odd years.

I think of Luke's account of the opening words of Jesus' Olivet Discourse, as recorded in chapter 21:

 8  And He said, Take heed that ye be not deceived:  for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ;  AND THE TIME DRAWETH NEAR:  go ye not therefore after them.

I know, I know.  Did Jesus mean this, or did He mean something else?

I think of the opening verses of The Revelation, as recorded in chapter 1:

 1  The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to shew unto His servants THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS;  and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John:

 2  Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

 3  BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, AND THEY THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY, AND KEEP THOSE THINGS THAT ARE WRITTEN THEREIN:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did what John record mean this, of did it mean something else?

I think of the last chapter of The Bible and what we find recorded there, in chapter 22:

 10  And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book:  FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

I know, I know.  Did the angel mean this, or did he mean something else?

In accord with what God's Word bears out and the history of God's World bears out, if any of the above means anything else (than what has been realized), it means this---what the above was written concerning was about to BEGIN for New Testament children of God.  AND IT DID!

Further, what the above was written concerning has not been something that has been fulfilled, but rather, it has been BEING fulfilled, and this will continue to be so, until it is fully fulfilled.

For me, when I began to understand things this way, all the prophetic puzzle pieces began to come together in a remarkable way.  And so far, in my experience of sharing and explaining my understanding on this forum, my understanding has only been further confirmed, IMHO.

Wouldn't it have to be taught to everyone on down the generations as if it was happening to them so that when it finally got to the last generation, it was taught correctly?  And it seems to me that it kept everyone on their toes anyhow.  Thoughts?

Hello DeighAnn,

I believe it should have been taught to everyone down through the generations, as simply as it reads, the same as it should be taught this very day.  It was of great, great relevance to the first century Christians, to every other century of Christians, and it is of great, great relevance to the present century of Christians---which includes us!

Concerning your second sentence, my most immediate thought is, "And rightly so!" 

Where we are presently is that we know that the 6th Seal has not been opened, which will include what I have referred to as "the intersecting event" of Christ's "Sign" Appearance and the rapture (Matt. 24:29-31ff). 

Edited April 3, 2021 by not an echo

[not an echo]

On 3/29/2021 at 4:18 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/28/2021 at 10:13 PM, not an echo said:

It seems to me that your understanding essentially reduces the Olivet Discourse to a prophecy of non-relevance for Christians of the past 2000 some odd years.

I think of Luke's account of the opening words of Jesus' Olivet Discourse, as recorded in chapter 21:

 8  And He said, Take heed that ye be not deceived:  for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ;  AND THE TIME DRAWETH NEAR:  go ye not therefore after them.

I don't think that at all. I'm saying it's not the fulfillment of the parallel prophecies of Daniel, Joel, Zech, Matt, Mark, Luke and Revelation concerning the end of the age. I can't place specific prophecies about a specific time in some other context, especially when the conditions in question existed for 2000+ years before the prophecies were given.

There have always been wars, famines, plagues, earthquakes, persecution and floods and that well before Jesus spoke to the four on the Mount of Olives. So then Jesus would not be a prophet but a historian. Since we know He is a prophet He is speaking to something more specific than geopolitical and temporal conditions that preexisted His time on earth.

Hello Diaste,

Now, if I said that we (humans) would still be driving gasoline powered automobiles 200 years from now, and it came to pass that we were still driving gasoline powered automobiles 200 years from now, would that make me a prophet, or merely a historian?  I'm trying to think of any historian that has ever given an account of history to come.  I guess it could be said of such a person that he or she would be considered a historical prophet.  But, isn't that kinda what all true prophets are?

When we think of what Jesus prophesied, why should it seem odd that some of what He said would take place had taken place before?  Consider afresh this post of mine from over a year ago...

It would have been easy for the followers of Christ to hope, or even suppose, that things would be different after Christ's resurrection, and especially after what happened on the Day of Pentecost---but it was not to be so.  In hindsight, it is easy to see Jesus, in the opening of His Olivet Discourse, conveying that, to whatever extent the forces of evil had been active up to that time, they were going to continue to be so, and especially in some Christianity-specific ways.

Think about it---Things could have been such that none would even presume to regard themselves to be some kind of Messiah, or Christ, but many have since that time, and several have in our own generation, like Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Sun Myung Moon, Father Divine, David Koresh, and others whose names I can't remember. 

Concerning wars, Christianity could have had such a far reaching impact that these would, in our generation, be considered something of the long distant past, but it's not quite that way, is it?

Also, modern man (with much pride) could have made such advances that things such as world hunger and pestilences are no longer a concern.  Or, there could have been a relaxing along all of the earth's fault lines to the point that earthquakes never happen any more.  Things could have turned out a lot differently, but they have not.

Christians could have become so very respected that none would even think in terms of persecuting, much less martyring them.  On the flip side, they could have faded from history like a little cult that never really got established. Again, things could have turned out a lot differently, but they have not.  Isn't that something?

Things could have turned out such that of Jesus Christ, history would bear out that He didn't know what He was talking about.  What do you think?  I think Jesus hit all His nails square on the head.  Shouldn't surprise us, He being THE DIVINE CARPENTER!

Early in what we now call the Church Age, our brothers and sisters in Christ might not have made all the connections, but now we have the perspective of retrospect.  As we say of hindsight, it is 20/20, and some 2000 years of hindsight has confirmed to my satisfaction that Jesus did indeed speak of things very relevant to the Church.  Think about it:  What He said for openers (e.g. Matt. 24:4-11) has fit every century of the Christian era, if not every decade, if not every year.  The more one becomes aware of what all is happening in this world, the more it seems that what He said fits every day!

Now, after the rapture, I certainly believe that there will be an escalation of things---in the same category of which Jesus spoke---and even to the point of running rampant---but this happens in connection with the sounding of the trumpets.  For example, during that time, deception will run rampant, even to the setting up of the kingdom of the Antichrist (Rev. 13:1-5ff).  Secondly, during that time we have an account of some kind of war, wherein one-third of the population will be killed (Rev. 9:15-18).  There has never been this kind of war.  Thirdly, the catastrophes (and resultant poverty) of that time will be on a scale that seems unimaginable (Rev. 8:6-13).  And fourthly, there will be no limit to the persecution and martyrdom that will take place during that time, for all who will not succumb to the rule of the Antichrist will be subject to death (Rev. 13:11-15ff).  From another angle, for those who can accept that the four horsemen have been riding since early in the Church Era, the tribulation they have already caused is just a precursor to what they and/or their cohorts will effect after the Church is gone.

The way I see it, we have compelling evidence that the first four seals were opened early in the era of the Church (as early as late first century), and represent not future judgments of God that pertain to Daniel's 70th Week (as so commonly interpreted), but present liberties that have been granted to Satan (he would have NONE otherwise!) to ply his craft post-Cross.  I can almost see Satan negotiating with God for these liberties.  I again submit that these seals reveal the spiritual realm activities of Satan---and his henchmen, the four horsemen---to bring about tribulation during the centuries of NT Christianity.  As I see it, the four horsemen have been riding all this time and have left their trails down through the corridors of Church history, even unto our present day.

Before moving on Diaste, as I see it, the thing of forecasting what tomorrow holds is too big for me (other than it won't be any different than what Jesus spoke 2000 years ago).  I could easily imagine the Caesar's thinking that it wouldn't be too long till there wouldn't be any further war, for the empire's subject peoples would eventually realize that it was in their best interest to cease resisting Rome.  Hey, with America's bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the subsequent end of World War II, it could have been logically surmised that the threat of nuclear war would be a deterrent to any further wars.  I mean, why didn't pacifism take?  Well, we know Diaste.  I'm just saying that things could have been a lot different.  I mean, what if atheists had been right, and it was found that we did indeed evolve from lifeless muck?  It could have been that we annihilated ourselves in the 70's---then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.  Or, it could have been that the aliens that seeded our planet with life way back yonder made the scene at the turn of the century and now we are back and forth with them through worm holes doing space exploration at warp speeds...

Things could have been a lot different.  The fact that they are not should give any atheist or agnostic pause.  Is it what Jesus said it was going to be?  Of course it is.  It's in our face.

Edited February 1, 2023 by not an echo