What "things" were "at hand" to "come to pass" (Rev. 1:1-3)?

[JohnR7]

On 4/11/2020 at 2:56 AM, missmuffet said:

The idea is not that the event may occur soon, but that when it does, it will be sudden. 

Everything in the universe is connected to everything else in real time. There is no delay. We could go from here to anywhere in the universe suddenly - but usually we would be prepared first and that could take at least two or three seconds. Paul talks about in the twinkle of an eye. (1cor 15:52)

[Diaste]

16 hours ago, JoeCanada said:

Hi Diaste,

I think you're right on the money here.

One of the greatest  Bible expositors ever, noted theologian and New Testament translator Henry Alford translates "the things that are" in Rev 1:19 as

"things that they signify"......from the Greek "Ha Eisin"................. The word "eisin is plural...... "The things that are" would require a singular verb.

 The reason that most translators write " things that were, are and will be" type of phrase is because it supports their theology that the Letters to the Seven Churches are historic and it supports their preconceived outline of the BofR.

But if Henry Alford's literal translation is used in Rev 1:19, it would read...." Write the things which you have seen (the vision of Jesus) and the things that they signify". 

Do the various aspects of Jesus appearing in the Letters to the 7 Churches( L7C )  have symbolic meaning? Yes, of course. So John is told to write "what you have seen and what they signify" 

Up to this point, all that John had seen was the vision of the risen Christ. And each aspect of Jesus' appearance in the L7C has symbolic meaning. 

When a person then studies the L7C , they will then understand the meaning of those aspects.

If the BofR is an explanation of the 70th week of Daniel and our deliverance by Christ at the end of the age, then why interject info about Christian living into an apocalypitc book?..............The L7C were written in apocalyptic language

Of course, I don't think any of this works if a person alludes to a pre-trib theology. They have to make the L7C historic.....which mentioned above really has no place in an "apocalyptic book".

If the pre-trib crowd maintains imminence, that Jesus can come back at any moment, anytime....... why do they then maintain that the Letters to the 7 Churches are "church ages".? That makes no sense with the theory of imminence. 

 

I found this on a Greek/English translator for Rev 1:19 "So write down what you have seen, and what is to come, and what is to come after it." which is the translation of the Greek: "γράψον οὖν ἃ εἶδες καὶ ἃ εἰσὶν καὶ ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα."

For sure it's a modern Greek translation, probably, but the context is everything all the time. Earlier, Jesus said in v 11 'what you see write in a book'. John hadn't seen anything by this point. Then by v 19 he had seen an amazing vision and was told 'write what you have seen'. To me that looks like an emphasis on not only capturing what he will seen but not to miss the vision of v 12-18 either. I don't about you but that's the only thing concerning the vision that he 'had seen' from what I read. 

I still think it better to view this as an overall 'beholding' of the entire vision of Revelation in which case I fully agree with Alford this is a beholding of the entire scope of future events and the visions and marvels and their significance.  It's pretty clear from the context and a modern translation John is told to write down 'what is to come' and that if this is historic we should have seen the evidence of the 'past' part of this, which we have not.

I agree with this: "If the pre-trib crowd maintains imminence, that Jesus can come back at any moment, anytime....... why do they then maintain that the Letters to the 7 Churches are "church ages".? That makes no sense with the theory of imminence."

But certain schools of thought will not allow for logic born of context.

 

[WilliamL]

8 hours ago, Diaste said:

On 10/10/2020 at 11:10 AM, JoeCanada said:

One of the greatest  Bible expositors ever, noted theologian and New Testament translator Henry Alford translates "the things that are" in Rev 1:19 as

"things that they signify"......from the Greek "Ha Eisin"................. The word "eisin is plural...... "The things that are" would require a singular verb.

 

Expand  

I found this on a Greek/English translator for Rev 1:19 "So write down what you have seen, and what is to come, and what is to come after it." which is the translation of the Greek: "γράψον οὖν ἃ εἶδες καὶ ἃ εἰσὶν καὶ ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα."

I think you both are making a mountain out of a molehill here.

RE: Joe's comment that a singular verb would be required: the subject --- "those/the [things]" -- is plural, so the verb must be plural also, which eisin is. It is the 3rd person plural form of "eimi", which means "to be." So the translation "are" is correct, without question. Reading anything more into it is just adding one's own presumption into the text.

Translating this as "what is to come" is singular subject, singular verb, and future tense, none of which are in any way supported by the Greek.

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Translating this as "what is to come" is singular subject, singular verb, and future tense, none of which are in any way supported by the Greek.

And yet when the verse in it's entirety is plugged into a modern translator it's rendered 'what is to come'.

"What you have seen(perceived, beheld, aware) what is to come, and what is to come after." is what even modern translators come up with. So I'm going with that since the context, dictionary, lexicon and normal understanding agree with the translators.

[Justin Adams]

To answer the OP. Citation below is from Wiki that I do not normally use. It is sufficient for the purpose to relate how much devastation occurred.

The First Jewish–Roman War began in the year 66 CE, originating in the Greek and Jewish religious tensions, and later escalated due to anti-taxation protests and attacks upon Roman citizens.[28] In response to the Roman plunder of the Second Jewish Temple and the execution of up to 6,000 Jews in Jerusalem, a full-scale rebellion erupted. The Roman military garrison of Judaea was quickly overrun by rebels, while the pro-Roman king Herod Agrippa II together with Roman officials fled Jerusalem. As it became clear the rebellion was getting out of control, Cestius Gallus, the legate of Syria, brought the Syrian army, based on XII Fulminata and reinforced by auxiliary troops, to restore order and quell the revolt. Despite initial advances, the Syrian Legion was ambushed and defeated by Jewish rebels at the Battle of Beth Horon with 6,000 Romans massacred and the Legio aquila lost – a result that shocked the Roman leadership.

The experienced and unassuming general Vespasian was then tasked with crushing the rebellion in Judaea province. His son Titus was appointed second-in-command. Vespasian was given four legions and assisted by forces of King Agrippa II. In 67 CE he invaded Galilee. While avoiding a direct attack on the reinforced city of Jerusalem which was packed with the main rebel force, Titus' forces launched a persistent campaign to eradicate rebel strongholds and punish the population. Within several months Vespasian and Titus took over the major Jewish strongholds of Galilee and finally overran Jotapata under command of Yosef ben Matitiyahu, following a 47-day siege. Meantime in Jerusalem, an attempt by Sicarii leader Menahem to take control of the city failed, resulting in his execution. A peasant leader Simon Bar-Giora was ousted from the city by the new moderate Judean government and Ananus ben Ananus began reinforcing the city.[citation needed]

Driven from Galilee, Zealot rebels and thousands of refugees arrived in Judea, creating political turmoil in Jerusalem. Zealots were at first sealed in the Temple compound. However, confrontation between the mainly Sadducee Jerusalemites and the mainly Zealot factions of the Northern Revolt under the command of John of Giscala and Eleazar ben Simon became evident. With Edomites entering the city and fighting on the side of the Zealots, Ananus ben Ananus was killed and his forces suffered severe casualties. Simon bar Giora, commanding 15,000 troops, was then invited into Jerusalem by the Sadducee leaders to stand against the Zealots, and quickly took control over much of the city. Bitter infighting between factions of Bar Giora, John and Elazar followed through the year 69 CE.[citation needed]

After a lull in the military operations, owing to civil war and political turmoil in Rome, Vespasian returned to Rome and was accepted as the new Emperor in 69 CE. With Vespasian's departure, Titus besieged the center of rebel resistance in Jerusalem in early 70 CE. While the first two walls of Jerusalem were breached within three weeks, a stubborn stand prevented the Roman Army from breaking the third and thickest wall. Following a brutal seven-month siege, in which Zealot infighting resulted in the burning of the entire food supply of the city to enhance "fighting to the end", the Romans finally succeeded in breaching the weakened Jewish forces in the summer of 70 CE. Following the fall of Jerusalem, Titus left for Rome, while Legion X Fretensis defeated the remaining Jewish strongholds later on, finalizing the Roman campaign in Masada in 73/74 CE.

[not an echo]

On 10/9/2020 at 9:35 PM, JoeCanada said:

Hey n-a e,

Let me ask you a question. 

Do you believe that  the seven churches in the BofR are "church ages"?

On 10/10/2020 at 12:10 PM, JoeCanada said:

If the pre-trib crowd maintains imminence, that Jesus can come back at any moment, anytime....... why do they then maintain that the Letters to the 7 Churches are "church ages".? That makes no sense with the theory of imminence. 

On 10/11/2020 at 5:18 AM, Diaste said:

I agree with this: "If the pre-trib crowd maintains imminence, that Jesus can come back at any moment, anytime....... why do they then maintain that the Letters to the 7 Churches are "church ages".? That makes no sense with the theory of imminence."

But certain schools of thought will not allow for logic born of context.

Hey Joe and Diaste,

Sorry for the lapse.  Been doing a little reviewing and noted afresh your above posts concerning the letters to the seven churches and the belief by many (who hold to the common pre-trib view) that these represent church ages.  Whereas I am pre-trib in my understanding, I have long been unable to accept that Revelation chapters 2-3 represent church ages.  Though I was raised under the tutelage of pre-trib rapture thought, there are many beliefs of that position that I could not continue to hold.  As with others (perhaps you included), I too went down my own path of discovering what my Creator would have me to regard as the genuine truths of His Word.  This path led to what I believe to be a solid pre-trib rapture view, the view I speak of more fully in my thread, 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/)

I hope that you will come to understand my heart concerning this view (if you haven't perceived it already).  For me, while the study of prophecy is very involved, it is so very interesting.  And, in my journey and search, I have found what I regard to be some very interesting truths that I have longed to share with others in the family of God.  I have learned from what God has revealed through many others.  It would be a blessing to me (especially in consideration of my background) to think that others may learn something from what God has revealed through me.  In my eyes, I'm really still a "newbie" on the boards, with some things possibly still to learn about how best to reply.  What has most consistently been on my heart is just to share and try to explain, as a brother in Christ and as time permits.  Today, we're in a deep freeze/snow storm out here in Western Kentucky!  But, I could still use some more time! 

Edited February 15, 2021 by not an echo
add link

[not an echo]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:51 AM, Justin Adams said:

To answer the OP. Citation below is from Wiki that I do not normally use. It is sufficient for the purpose to relate how much devastation occurred.

The First Jewish–Roman War began in the year 66 CE, originating in the Greek and Jewish religious tensions, and later escalated due to anti-taxation protests and attacks upon Roman citizens.[28] In response to the Roman plunder of the Second Jewish Temple and the execution of up to 6,000 Jews in Jerusalem, a full-scale rebellion erupted. The Roman military garrison of Judaea was quickly overrun by rebels, while the pro-Roman king Herod Agrippa II together with Roman officials fled Jerusalem. As it became clear the rebellion was getting out of control, Cestius Gallus, the legate of Syria, brought the Syrian army, based on XII Fulminata and reinforced by auxiliary troops, to restore order and quell the revolt. Despite initial advances, the Syrian Legion was ambushed and defeated by Jewish rebels at the Battle of Beth Horon with 6,000 Romans massacred and the Legio aquila lost – a result that shocked the Roman leadership.

The experienced and unassuming general Vespasian was then tasked with crushing the rebellion in Judaea province. His son Titus was appointed second-in-command. Vespasian was given four legions and assisted by forces of King Agrippa II. In 67 CE he invaded Galilee. While avoiding a direct attack on the reinforced city of Jerusalem which was packed with the main rebel force, Titus' forces launched a persistent campaign to eradicate rebel strongholds and punish the population. Within several months Vespasian and Titus took over the major Jewish strongholds of Galilee and finally overran Jotapata under command of Yosef ben Matitiyahu, following a 47-day siege. Meantime in Jerusalem, an attempt by Sicarii leader Menahem to take control of the city failed, resulting in his execution. A peasant leader Simon Bar-Giora was ousted from the city by the new moderate Judean government and Ananus ben Ananus began reinforcing the city.[citation needed]

Driven from Galilee, Zealot rebels and thousands of refugees arrived in Judea, creating political turmoil in Jerusalem. Zealots were at first sealed in the Temple compound. However, confrontation between the mainly Sadducee Jerusalemites and the mainly Zealot factions of the Northern Revolt under the command of John of Giscala and Eleazar ben Simon became evident. With Edomites entering the city and fighting on the side of the Zealots, Ananus ben Ananus was killed and his forces suffered severe casualties. Simon bar Giora, commanding 15,000 troops, was then invited into Jerusalem by the Sadducee leaders to stand against the Zealots, and quickly took control over much of the city. Bitter infighting between factions of Bar Giora, John and Elazar followed through the year 69 CE.[citation needed]

After a lull in the military operations, owing to civil war and political turmoil in Rome, Vespasian returned to Rome and was accepted as the new Emperor in 69 CE. With Vespasian's departure, Titus besieged the center of rebel resistance in Jerusalem in early 70 CE. While the first two walls of Jerusalem were breached within three weeks, a stubborn stand prevented the Roman Army from breaking the third and thickest wall. Following a brutal seven-month siege, in which Zealot infighting resulted in the burning of the entire food supply of the city to enhance "fighting to the end", the Romans finally succeeded in breaching the weakened Jewish forces in the summer of 70 CE. Following the fall of Jerusalem, Titus left for Rome, while Legion X Fretensis defeated the remaining Jewish strongholds later on, finalizing the Roman campaign in Masada in 73/74 CE.

Hello Justin,

By your answer to my opening post, I'm supposing that you are of the Preterist position.  According to my understanding of The Revelation, Christ's Olivet Discourse, history, and more, what John was shown that would be "hereafter" (Rev. 1:19/4:1) indeed began, but has not yet progressed beyond the 5th Seal.

As I have come to see everything, many prophetic puzzle pieces come together in a very interesting way when the opening three verses of The Revelation are understood in their simplicity.  If it is understood that the horsemen of the first four seals have been riding down through the corridors of history since as early as the first century, then it can be seen that The Revelation held every bit as much relevance for the seven churches in Asia (Rev. 1:11) as it holds for the churches of our present generation---and every church in between.  To me, this understanding reinforces the Divinity of prophecy!  Further, because of the wording of the 5th Seal and my conviction that the opening of the 6th Seal is imminent, I see the 5th Seal as having already been opened as well.  Consider my OP of the following five threads:

The First Seal and the Horseman on the White Horse (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/250674-the-first-seal-and-the-horseman-on-the-white-horse/)

The Second Seal and the Horseman on the Red Horse (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/250725-the-second-seal-and-the-horseman-on-the-red-horse/)

The Third Seal and the Horseman on the Black Horse (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/250748-the-third-seal-and-the-horseman-on-the-black-horse/)

The Fourth Seal and the Horseman on the Pale Horse (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/250832-the-fourth-seal-and-the-horseman-on-the-pale-horse/)

The Fifth Seal and the Cry of the Martyrs (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/250955-the-fifth-seal-and-the-cry-of-the-martyrs/)

Concerning the 6th Seal, when it is opened, "then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven" (Matt. 24:30), which will be a sign for the Israelite nation at least seven years before Christ's Second Advent.  It is during this sign event that the rapture of the Church will take place (e.g., Matt. 24:31 and Rev.7:9-17).

As I have put forth in another thread, the Seven Sealed Book could rightly be entitled THE DAY OF THE LORD (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/249265-a-title-suggestion-for-the-seven-sealed-book/), as the same day that the 6th Seal is opened, the 7th Seal can also be opened, which will mean that the day of the Lord has begun indeed (Rev. 6:17).  At this time, the stage will begin to be reset for the fulfilling of Daniel's 70th Week, which will not begin until some months later (Rev. 9:5, 10).  This is evidenced by the "little book open" that John speaks of in chapter 10, which I see as being the little book of Daniel (Dan. 12:4, 8-10) and then the opening verses of chapter 11, where we have the first mentioning of two 3-1/2 year periods of time, which together equal seven years.

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo
add links

[Justin Adams]

6 hours ago, not an echo said:

Preterist position

I am of no particular position. I do not follow literally the 'bowls' etc as that portion is probably recapitulation anyway.

Something does not equate very well with any of the eschatology systems. It just seems that each idea cheats with the data and extrapolates to the unnecessary.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Justin Adams

[not an echo]

On 2/16/2021 at 3:18 AM, Justin Adams said:

I am of no particular position. I do not follow literally the 'bowls' etc as that portion is probably recapitulation anyway.

Something does not equate very well with any of the eschatology systems. It just seems that each idea cheats with the data and extrapolates to the unnecessary.

I believe I may understand.  I grew up with exposure to nothing but the common pre-trib rapture view and there came a time that I began to have flags to go up over this or that.  Frustrating was the thing of bringing something up from time to time and having it passed off as not relevant or not worthy of comment, etc.  In time, I had to settle the thing of where my loyalties lay, and this began a journey that has remained the most adventurous of my life---my walk with Christ and the seeking of the guidance of His Spirit concerning truth (Jn. 16:13).  It is easy for me to say that I may be wrong, for I know that in my corrupted condition, I cannot say that I always hear Him correctly, or fully.  I have the same problem with my physical ears, as my wife or son will attest!  But, I do continue to try, which is certainly in our best interest!  I hope you will continue likewise. 

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo