Timing in the Revelation

[extravagantchristian]

NOTE TO ALL: Posts originally in the Pre-Trib forum, moved here for open debate and discussion. Mark S

Hi Godsstudent,

I begin with the proposition that the vision recorded in the Revelation of Jesus Christ presents a sequential scenario except where otherwise noted. We should use the time chronology words contained in the vision. "And then", "After this", the like.

Seals are opened, then the angels are given trumpets and the trumpets are sounded, then bowl are given and poured out.

Parenthetical passages are grammatically indicated.

I'll try to start with a thumbnail sketch.

The two witnesses prophesy for 3.5 years, unable to be harmed. They will be killed by the beast who is given power over the saints for 3.5 years, until his power is taken away when Jesus returns.

Therefore, the two witnesses prophesy for the first 1/2 of the remaining 7 years, the 70th week. The Beast is given power for the last 1/2. Then Jesus returns.

In Revelation 11, the two witnesses are killed, lie dead, then return to life and ascend into heaven. And God tells us, the second woe is past, the third is coming.

The three woes are the last three trumpets. So when the witnesses ascend, 6 of the 7 trumpets have already been sounded. As the first woe is past, this is the 5 months of locust things tormenting people, the 2nd woe is the slaughter of 1/3 of humanity by the 200,000,000 horsemen, so the trumpets are well within the first 3.5 years.

(I don't have any comment on the Rapture)

So you're saying that the 2 witness are here for the first half (42 months) of the 70th week.

That means that all 7 seals have to happen right at the beginning of the 70th week. (since 2 witnesses come after the 4th trumpet Rev 8:13)

That means 1/4 of the population will be dead
stars fell to earth
sky receeded
1/3 trees and grass burned
1/3 sea creatures dead

All happening during the first few days of the 70th week? Does that sound likely?



The 3 woes give us an idea of the timing of the 2 witnesses. The 3 woes are first mentioned in Rev 8:13 which is right AFTER the 4th Trumpet.

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... =73&end=73 < this link shows the chronology of the woes in relation to everything else.

The way I see it, there are only 2 options:
2 OPTIONS:

1: All 3 Woes come during 1st half of 70th week
1st woe: Rev 9:12 (right after the 5th angel sounds) Locusts.
2nd woe: Rev 11:14 Occurs sometime during the 42 month 2 witness testimony.
3rd woe: Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

2: All 3 Woes happen AFTER the mid point AOD
1st woe: Rev 12:12 "devil come down to you" could actually be the 1st woe, that coincides w the locusts @ 5 trumpet (btw i dont think the locusts are insects, but false prophets doing signs and wonders matt 24 mark 13 luke 21)
2nd woe: 2 witnesses
3rd woe: Return of Jesus

Remember, not every event in Revelation HAS TO HAPPEN chronologically. Much like the account of Adam and Eve in Genesis. The story is told and then retold from another perspective, all with in the same chapter.

[extravagantchristian]

Mark S

If I'm understanding you correctly, you believe in a rapture that takes place after the 6th seal.

After 1/4 of the population is dead
stars have fallen from heaven to earth, sky has receded as a scroll
1/3 of the trees and grass is burned up
1/3 of the sea creatures are dead.

I don't know what you consider tribulation, but that sounds traumatic to say in the least

Is your view really Pre-trib? It sounds kinda like pre-wrath.

[extravagantchristian]

I pretty much agree that the trumpets will come after the seals.

I'm not too sure about the Rapture timing. I say prepare (mentally) for the worst and hope for the best. But I like that Jesus hints of an early rescue.

"Not a hair on your head will be touched"

"I will keep you from the hour of tribulation coming upon the whole earth"

I think it's possible that Daniel gives us the best clues on Rapture timing

Daniel 12:12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.

If all the time periods in Daniel have the same starting point (the beginning of the 70th week) then we could have our answer right there.

1,290 AOD (42 Months) from the start of 70th week
1,335 Rapture (44 Months) from the start of the 70th week
2,300 Jesus Return (6.3 years) from the start of the 70th week

Jesus said the time would be cut short, so what would have been 7 years will probably be less.

[extravagantchristian]

One possible problem with an early rapture:

The Bible says that the dead will RISE FIRST, and we will not be made perfect apart from them.

So there's only 1 resurrection before the milinnium.

So the rapture can't happen until the dead rise first.

But then daniel says that "the saints will be given into his hand for 42 months."

Does that mean that the Christians who are "left behind" will not be resurrected?

Will they never be made perfect?

[mark s]

Hi EC,

Pre-trib is pre-wrath, just more pre-wrath than Pre-Wrath.

So it may sound the same in some ways.

For a more complete outline how I see it,

The birth pangs described in Matthew 24 build until the time has come.
The seals are opened, these birth pangs become permanent as Government, Social Structure, Economy, and Ecology all are turned irreparably hostile to humanity.

The fifth seal is a conversation with martyrs "Under the Altar", a very interesting designation.

The sixth seal contains the worldwide earthquake which I think is the same earthquake in Ezekiel 38, as Gog/Magog et. al. are about to invade.

This all happens in the same time it takes to read it.

The seventh seal brings silence while the 144,000 servants of God are sealed. The 7th week begins.

A mystery multitude is seen in heaven. I think this is the raptured church.

And the 7 angels are given 7 trumpets. The first sounds, and fire, blood, and hail shower the earth, destroying Gog/Magog et. al., the first trumpet. And so it goes on, the remaining trumpets sounded during the first 3.5 years, as the conditions begun by the first 4 seals get worse and worse, the death toll mounting, tyranny, violence, abject poverty and hyper-inflation, disease and war and animal attacks.

The church gone but 144,000 Jews sealed. The beast rising as the two witnesses prophesy, striking the earth with plagues, unable to be harmed, but hated for their message.

Then mid-week, the beast given power over the holy ones, the first thing he does is kill the witnesses, only to see them rise and ascend to heaven 3 days later.

And the great tribulation begins. The beast persecutes towards destruction the people of God. Bowls of wrath are poured out. Babylon is judged. And Jesus returns to stop it all before there is no life left on earth!

He gathers Israel and takes His throne. Then He gathers the nations to judge them.

Hopefully this will give a better thumbnail sketch.

Much love!
Mark

[mark s]

I pretty much agree that the trumpets will come after the seals.

I'm not too sure about the Rapture timing. I say prepare (mentally) for the worst and hope for the best. But I like that Jesus hints of an early rescue.

Hi EC,

Jesus also said the truth will set you free. If we can know the truth, it sets us free.

I'd say, know God, and then it won't matter.

I think it's possible that Daniel gives us the best clues on Rapture timing

Daniel 12:12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.

If all the time periods in Daniel have the same starting point (the beginning of the 70th week) then we could have our answer right there.

1,290 AOD (42 Months) from the start of 70th week
1,335 Rapture (44 Months) from the start of the 70th week
2,300 Jesus Return (6.3 years) from the start of the 70th week

Except, do these times relate to the catching up of the church? Or are they here to describe something else?

Jesus said the time would be cut short, so what would have been 7 years will probably be less.

I think the exact wording is, "Unless the time had been truncated, no flesh would survive. My understanding is that Jesus' words meant that the time had been limited to 42 months only of great tribulation. It would not be allowed to continue until no life was left.

Much love!
Mark

[mark s]

One possible problem with an early rapture:

The Bible says that the dead will RISE FIRST, and we will not be made perfect apart from them.

So there's only 1 resurrection before the milinnium.

So the rapture can't happen until the dead rise first.

But then daniel says that "the saints will be given into his hand for 42 months."

Does that mean that the Christians who are "left behind" will not be resurrected?

Will they never be made perfect?

Here again, just staying with summary so you can get a better idea of where I'm coming from.

I see the church removed at the beginning of what God called through Jeremiah, "the time of Jacob's distress, but he will be saved through it" (Ch. 30).

At that time, the dead in Christ rise first, the living are transformed and caught up.
Then, the 144,000 Jews are sealed, and begin to fulfill Jesus' instructions to His sent ones in Matthew 10, going through the towns of Israel.
Those saved during this time will either die before Jesus returns, or survive until He does.
Those who die before Jesus returns will resurrect when Jesus comes back, along with the OT faithful.
Those who die during Jesus' 1000 year kingdom do not resurrect, they die for cause.
All the dead stand judgement at the end of the 1000 years, after which all is made new.

Much love!
Mark

[1whowaits]

EC, Mark, just some thoughts regarding timing. The framework for God's timing would likely be the Ancient Hebrew calendar, which He set up. The calendar includes the 7 appointed feasts, Jesus fulfilled the first 4 at His first coming, and will likely fulfill the last 3 at His second coming.

The 7th seal and 7th trumpet describe rituals and events that only occurred on the Day of Atonement, suggesting that Jesus returns at armageddon on the Day of Atonement. In Zech 14 the nations come to Jerusalem every year to worship Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles, suggesting that Jesus performs a significant event during the feast of Tabernacles, likely setting up His kingdom and beginning of the rebuilding of His Temple (Haggai 2- 'on the 21st day of the seventh month the word of the Lord came...I will shake all nations, and the desired of all nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory...and in this place I will grant peace..') The 21st day of the 7th month falls toward the end of the Feast of Tabernacles.

There is another feast celebrated on the calendar noted in scripture but not set up by God originally, the feast of the Dedication (of the Temple) John 10:22, known as the festival of lights. Haggai also mentions another date- 'From this day on, from this the 24th day of the 9th month, give careful thought to the day when the foundation of the Lord's Temple was laid.....The word of the Lord came to Haggai a second time on the 24th day of the 9th month...I will shake the heavens and the earth...I will take you, my servant Zerubbabel...I will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you..'

The evening of the 24th day of the 9th month begins the feast of the Dedication of the Temple, it may be that the rebuilt millenial Temple will be dedicated or 're-dedicated' on that date.

Considering the Hebrew calendar, some sense could be made of time periods mentioned in scripture. 1,260 days/aka 42 months, aka 3 1/2 years- is usually the period from the Passover until the fall feasts. It is also mentioned as the time of the AC's authority (Rev 13), Israel in the wilderness (Rev 12), the power of the holy people being broken (Dan 12), the time of the Great Tribulation. It is thought that the AC will come to power at Passover (appears to be raised from the dead- Rev 13), and his power will end when Jesus returns at armageddon, likely on the Day of Atonement.

1,335 days mentioned in Daniel 12, if started at the time the AC came to power at the beginning of the 1,260 days, would occur 75 days after the Day of Atonement, and end at the 25th day of the 9th month, the feast of Dedication of the Temple- 'Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days'.

Daniel 8 describes 2,300 days 'then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated'. The sanctuary of Temple will likely not be reconsecrated until the millenial Temple is built by Jesus. If that event were to occur on the 25th day of the 9th month, 2,300 days prior to that would fall around the time of the Feast of Trumpets or fall feasts, about 6.5 years earlier. From the context of Dan 7 and 8, that could be the time of the fall of the Bear, aka the Ram, likely Russia and Iran, an event which could be Gog-Magog.

[mark s]

Hi 1whowaits,

It sounds like that's how it might lay out if your idea about the feasts is correct. I don't have any thoughts on how the end times align with the feasts, although I won't be surprised if it all does. But I don't have Scriptures to define if for me so I have to just wait and see.

So I too am one who waits!

Much love!
Mark

[shorttribber]

The seventh seal brings silence while the 144,000 servants of God are sealed. The 7th week begins.

A mystery multitude is seen in heaven. I think this is the raptured church.

And the 7 angels are given 7 trumpets. The first sounds, and fire, blood, and hail shower the earth, destroying Gog/Magog et. al., the first trumpet. And so it goes on, the remaining trumpets sounded during the first 3.5 years, as the conditions begun by the first 4 seals get worse and worse, the death toll mounting, tyranny, violence, abject poverty and hyper-inflation, disease and war and animal attacks.
The church gone but 144,000 Jews sealed. The beast rising as the two witnesses prophesy, striking the earth with plagues, unable to be harmed, but hated for their message.Then mid-week, the beast given power over the holy ones, the first thing he does is kill the witnesses, only to see them rise and ascend to heaven 3 days later.And the great tribulation begins.

Hi mark,
Could you comment on one part that seems to be out of sequence....using your idea that all the revelation is sequential.

The 2 witnesses prophecy for 3.5 years....how is it they do not appear in the revelation until After the sixth trump? they appear in the revelation after the appearance of the mighty angel, after the sixth trump.

If the revelation were sequential, they would appear in the vision at the Beginning of the First Trump.

Since they are supposedly, according to your opinion, raptured Before the middle of the week, they would have needed to begin their ministry at the First Trump, not AFTER the Sixth.

[shorttribber]

To learn the chronology of the Revelation to John it is very important to understand the meaning of the phrase, "After these things".

marks has said the following....
..................................................................................................................................................
"I begin with the proposition that the vision recorded in the Revelation of Jesus Christ presents a sequential scenario except where otherwise noted. We should use the time chronology words contained in the vision. "And then", "After this", the like."
..................................................................................................................................................

Ok, according to the rule that is being suggested in the above quotation, we should comprehend the words " "And then", "After this", the like"..("After these things" {in the KJV})Chronologically.

Or in other words, we should comprehend or believe that those like phrases introduce an Actual Real Time Event Chronologically.

However, that is not how the Like phrases, "And then", "After this", "After these things" are meant to be understood.

Those phrases simply mean that After John saw one portion of the main vision, he then recorded what he saw After That, or what he Saw Next.

That is all it means.......it's just as though he could have said, "And this is what I Saw Next".....or "This is what I Saw After That portion of the vision".

If you should have any lingering doubt of what I'm saying, the following should help your disbelief.

Rev 4
1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. ..................till the end of chap 4

cont. from the beginning of chap 5....................13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.


Only ONE "AFTER THIS" is mentioned at the beginning of chapter 4, and according to Mark's "After This" rule, the whole of chapters 4 and 5 would be Prophetically Fulfilled in REAL TIME chronologically.


How is it that BEFORE the opening of ANY SEALS at All, the Whole of All of God's Creation would be Giving him his Due Praise and Glory as recorded in Rev 5:13 above?

There can only be one answer, and one answer only.

"After these things", and such like, are meant to be understood as I have said.....and I will quote myself from above...

"Those phrases simply mean that After John saw one portion of the main vision, he then recorded what he saw After That, or what he Saw Next.

That is all it means.......it's just as though he could have said, "And this is what I Saw Next".....or "This is what I Saw After That portion of the vision"."

[mark s]

The seventh seal brings silence while the 144,000 servants of God are sealed. The 7th week begins.

A mystery multitude is seen in heaven. I think this is the raptured church.

And the 7 angels are given 7 trumpets. The first sounds, and fire, blood, and hail shower the earth, destroying Gog/Magog et. al., the first trumpet. And so it goes on, the remaining trumpets sounded during the first 3.5 years, as the conditions begun by the first 4 seals get worse and worse, the death toll mounting, tyranny, violence, abject poverty and hyper-inflation, disease and war and animal attacks.
The church gone but 144,000 Jews sealed. The beast rising as the two witnesses prophesy, striking the earth with plagues, unable to be harmed, but hated for their message.Then mid-week, the beast given power over the holy ones, the first thing he does is kill the witnesses, only to see them rise and ascend to heaven 3 days later.And the great tribulation begins.

Hi mark,
Could you comment on one part that seems to be out of sequence....using your idea that all the revelation is sequential.

The 2 witnesses prophecy for 3.5 years....how is it they do not appear in the revelation until After the sixth trump? they appear in the revelation after the appearance of the mighty angel, after the sixth trump.

If the revelation were sequential, they would appear in the vision at the Beginning of the First Trump.

Since they are supposedly, according to your opinion, raptured Before the middle of the week, they would have needed to begin their ministry at the First Trump, not AFTER the Sixth.

Hi ST,

I'm not sure I understand your question.

I don't see the two witnesses either being raptured, or that happening before the mid-week. The beast is only able to kill them when the 42 months begin.

And the Revelation is sequential, at least in those places where it says it is.

Much love!
mark

[mark s]

Any view of the Revelation that does not take it sequentially will inevitably come to places of which they will say, while is says this . . . while it would seem to mean this . . . if you just read it . . . well, it actually should be understood as something different . . . yes, it says this, but it means that. You have to just know.

I've yet to see an exception to this pattern.

Here is but one unassailable example, of many.

Those who overlap trumpets and seals, CANNOT be correct, as the trumpets are not handed to the angels until after the seals are opened. Those who claim - I'm not saying any do, this is just an example - the 4th trumpet CANNOT be a "different perspective" of the 4th seal, or concurrent with the 4th seal, or any of the seals, as the angel can't sound a trumpet he doesn't have, and he doesn't have it until the seals are opened.

Again, one of several examples, and, unless there is some part of this part of Scripture in which you want to assert means something other than what it says, this is the only reasonable conclusion, at least, in my opinion.

We need to take timing words in context.

For instance, "after this I saw . . ." may have a very different meaning from "and after this . . ." based on the context.

ST mentions Revelation 4:1, "And after this I looked . . ." This seems evident to me that John is speaking about himself, and uses standard sequential language. After I wrote that last sentence, I finished the last of a cup of coffee. After this sentence there will be more coffee in the cup.

In the first instance, I speaking in terms of sequence within my life experience. In the second, I'm speaking in terms of sequence apart from me, even though involving me.

I love what Walter Martin used to say, "Words have meanings". We must be careful with our words, or more to the point, God's Words.

Even if we don't seem to understand the sense of what He is saying, "but how can all a fallen creation praise God? It MUST be later" we should never try to change it. No matter what the size font.

Even in this example, if you follow through the objection to its logical conclusion, how, in fact, can a fallen creation praise God?? This then could only be fulfilled in the New Creation. But that's not the assertion. So there must be more to it than meets the eye! Maybe something we don't understand. But that doesn't give us permission to change it. I will change myself before changing God's Word.

It may be that there will be a very weird moment for the sinners in the worlds as every molecule in creation unites in praise for the creator. Or something else.

I believe the timing of the events in John's vision - a single vision - can be understood by locating the timing words, and look at how the are used in context.

Sequence of events
Sequence to the vision
Sequence of John's experience
Sequence of the heavenly events forming the framework for the vision

"After this I looked", John is speaking of himself, and his experience of the vision.
"And then seven angels were given seven trumpets", John is describing something that will happen after something else.

Once we have identified and understood each of these words, the answers will be in front of us.

Much love!
Mark

[shorttribber]

Mark,
Your words here....

Even if we don't seem to understand the sense of what He is saying, "but how can all a fallen creation praise God? It MUST be later" we should never try to change it. No matter what the size font.Even in this example, if you follow through the objection to its logical conclusion, how, in fact, can a fallen creation praise God?? This then could only be fulfilled in the New Creation. But that's not the assertion. So there must be more to it than meets the eye! Maybe something we don't understand. But that doesn't give us permission to change it. I will change myself before changing God's Word.

Seem very much to be saying this....

while it would seem to mean this . . . if you just read it . . . well, it actually should be understood as something different . . . yes, it says this, but it means that. You have to just know.

it says what it says mark...and because it does not fit your perspective, it must not mean what it plainly says. You can claim that I am suggesting some intellectual dishonesty, but I'm not. What I am saying is your simple unwillingness to think otherwise.
That is not dishonesty, that is just simply unwise.

Those who overlap trumpets and seals, the trumpets are not handed to the angels until after the seals are opened.

Can an event be foretold in a book, in an Introduction/preface/Overview BEFORE That Event occurs in real Time?

Yes, that is exactly how an Overview or intro works mark. And That is what the seals are...An Overview of the Whole space time as it pertains to the Battles and final Victory of Christ and the Church.

Of course, you think otherwise...but that's ok...must do other things now.

[Mr Baldy]

mark,
Could you comment on one part that seems to be out of sequence....using your idea that all the revelation is sequential.

The 2 witnesses prophecy for 3.5 years....how is it they do not appear in the revelation until After the sixth trump? they appear in the revelation after the appearance of the mighty angel, after the sixth trump.

If the revelation were sequential, they would appear in the vision at the Beginning of the First Trump.

Since they are supposedly, according to your opinion, raptured Before the middle of the week, they would have needed to begin their ministry at the First Trump, not AFTER the Sixth

[mark s]

mark,
Could you comment on one part that seems to be out of sequence....using your idea that all the revelation is sequential.

The 2 witnesses prophecy for 3.5 years....how is it they do not appear in the revelation until After the sixth trump? they appear in the revelation after the appearance of the mighty angel, after the sixth trump.

If the revelation were sequential, they would appear in the vision at the Beginning of the First Trump.

Since they are supposedly, according to your opinion, raptured Before the middle of the week, they would have needed to begin their ministry at the First Trump, not AFTER the Sixth

I'll go back to what I wrote about examining the language. You have to look at everything in context, with the words used. This is an oversimplification incorrectly applied.

Revelation 11:1-3 (ESV)

Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for p1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”

So then the underlying supposition is that since Chapter 11 comes after chapter 10, nothing from Chapter 11 can be speaking of anything that is in Chapter 10 or before. Am I getting your idea right?

"Then I was given. . ." John's experience. Not a vision timing cue. Therefore parenthetical to the narrative of events.

The two witness passage contains it's own timing outline. For 3.5 years of ministry, no one can harm them. For 3.5 years, the beast is given power over God's people. The beast kills the witness. Therefore, the witness prophesy during the first 3.5 years, the beast has power during the last 3.5 years.

Is there a particular reason you have in mind that when a passage is not linguistically connect to the preceding prophetic narrative, and contains its own timing detail, why we should not simply use the information the passage is question provides?

Much love!
Mark

[shorttribber]

Mark, please explain the great difference in these two phrases...

"And after these things I saw....."
"After this I looked......"

[shorttribber]

Hi ST,I'm not sure I understand your question.I don't see the two witnesses either being raptured, or that happening before the mid-week. The beast is only able to kill them when the 42 months begin.And the Revelation is sequential, at least in those places where it says it is.

If it is the first thing the AC does, only three days into the last 3.5 years, then they would have needed to begin their ministry only three days after the supposed beginning of the 70th week as you see it.
Yet, there appearance is not recorded until AFTER the sixth trump.....thus the revelation is not given sequential as you are saying.

Editing this in........
How is it that you do not believe them to be raptured or caught up after their death? The text says they do ascend into heaven ? ? whether it is three days into some second portion (according to your 7 trib year idea) of the 70th week or not, they still do go into heaven after they are raised alive.

[shorttribber]

"Then I was given. . ." John's experience. Not a vision timing cue. Therefore parenthetical to the narrative of events.

"Then" is a timing clue

Parenthetical because of the words "Then I was given" ?

I do believe that there is a parenthetical portion of the beginning of chapter 11 also...but not because of "Then I was given"

I can't see how you justify the parenthesis based on those words mark...just say'n

[shorttribber]

By the way mark....regarding this part of Rev 4:

13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.



the following text answers how Rev 4:13 is to be understood....
Romans
17As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” — He is our father in the presence of God, in whom he believed, the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being what does not yet exist.


King James Bible
(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.


it does not mean, for the sake of keeping things sequential..........

It may be that there will be a very weird moment for the sinners in the worlds as every molecule in creation unites in praise for the creator. Or something else.

I will stick with what is in agreement with Romans 4:17...it is a prophetic utterance and is not meant to be understood as sequential.

[mark s]

Hi ST,I'm not sure I understand your question.I don't see the two witnesses either being raptured, or that happening before the mid-week. The beast is only able to kill them when the 42 months begin.And the Revelation is sequential, at least in those places where it says it is.

If it is the first thing the AC does, only three days into the last 3.5 years, then they would have needed to begin their ministry only three days after the supposed beginning of the 70th week as you see it.
Yet, there appearance is not recorded until AFTER the sixth trump.....thus the revelation is not given sequential as you are saying.

OK. The two witness rise 3 days after they are killed. If they are killed as soon as the beast receives power to do so, they they would be killed at or about the mid-point, then raised to life and ascending into heaven 3 days into the 2nd half of your supposed, or my real, 70th week.

I'm not trying to discuss viewpoints here so much as I'm discussing the words of the text of Scripture, and what they are saying.

So given that they could be killed as soon as the moment the beast receives the power to do so, then yes, they would have to appear at the very beginning of the 70th week.

So then, your objection is that since the passage describing the two witness appears in the text after the passages of the trumpets, the witness can only appear after the trumpets themselves.

There are two issues with that.

One is that it is a faulty hermeneutic.

Consider, In Revelation 16:15, we read, "Behold, I am coming like a thief". Jesus speaking? In Revelation 22:20 the matter is put to rest. "I am coming quickly." Amen, even so, come Lord Jesus. He is the coming one. But in Revelation 16:15, this is after the "bowls of wrath", in them, God fills up His anger. Then, in Revelation 22:20, this is after the new creation. I would consider it evident that Jesus is not delaying His return until after the new creation. If after the bowls, that argues for post-trib post-wrath, the primary early church position, at least, as far as extant writings show.

An hermeneutic cannot rely solely on placement within the text. While that is very important, distinction should be made between passages that each contain their own timing information. If we use the timing information contained within the relevant passages, and harmonization with other passages, then the matter becomes clear in my opinion.

The second issue is that in this particular instance you end up with a serious conflict.

If the two witnesses prophesy during the final 3.5 years, your "short trib", then where the Bible says the beast is given power over the saints, it actually means only some of the saints, the witnesses are excluded. I don't see that in the text, and I'd be very reluctant to add to the words of this prophecy.

And what about where it says that if anyone tries to harm the witnesses, they will die by fire coming from their mouths? Is the beast exempt? I don't see that either.

If the two witnesses are killed by the beast, lay in the streets of Jerusalem for 3.5 days, while the earth dwellers party and send presents, how does this square with the fact - in this timeline, a short-trib where all this occurs in the same 3.5 years - how does partying and exchanging presents because the witnesses are dead square with the fact that this would be after Jesus' return, at the end of the 3.5 years? Is it partying and presents? Or destruction and judgment? The world watching as they lay in the street? Or a great earthquake tearing the city apart, raising it up into a large plateau? Heathen celebrating the death of God's people while angels are returning the scattered Israelites to the land, and as Jesus establishes His kingdom from Jerusalem?

These two scenarios just don't seem to line up to me. Any thoughts on these inconsistencies?

Much love!
Mark

[mark s]

Editing this in........
How is it that you do not believe them to be raptured or caught up after their death? The text says they do ascend into heaven ? ? whether it is three days into some second portion (according to your 7 trib year idea) of the 70th week or not, they still do go into heaven after they are raised alive.

Exactly!



The two witness ascended into heaven - anabesan - ascended - rather than were raptured - harpadzo - caught up. Different words.

And the 3.5 days is in the text.

We need to pay close attention to the words.

Much love!

Mark

[mark s]

Mark, please explain the great difference in these two phrases...

"And after these things I saw....."
"After this I looked......"

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

[mark s]

"Then I was given. . ." John's experience. Not a vision timing cue. Therefore parenthetical to the narrative of events.

"Then" is a timing clue

Parenthetical because of the words "Then I was given" ?

I do believe that there is a parenthetical portion of the beginning of chapter 11 also...but not because of "Then I was given"

I can't see how you justify the parenthesis based on those words mark...just say'n

I saw a movie, Australia, some years ago. There was a widow rancher trying to get her massive and valuable herd to market, but the other ranchers tried to prevent her. Then the ranch manager decided to help her, and then they drove the herd to the ships. It was a long movie, so then I went to the snack bar and got a refill on my large popcorn. I eat a popcorn per movie, but this one was twice as long! After I got my refill I returned. So they got to the docks, but the other ranchers were there waiting. But then the hero saved the day, the herd was spared the people were saved. After it all, the widow got her payday, the orphan got a family, do you see how the same words are used differently? Then, after, same words but different use.

Is there any difficulty following my narrative? I told about what I saw, and intermingled, something I did. Is it not clear to see that when I am describing what I did, that this does not impact the narrative of the movie? And that my little side trip has its own timing information? You could even make a good educated guess about when in the movie I left.

But if this is clear to understand, why must we make the Revelation so complicated?? Why not read it just the same way? but if we don't understand the harmonization of passages, we are faced with the difficulty of either backing off of our views, or claiming that, "while it says this, it means that", in one form or another.

Much love!
Mark

[shorttribber]

Editing this in........
How is it that you do not believe them to be raptured or caught up after their death? The text says they do ascend into heaven ? ? whether it is three days into some second portion (according to your 7 trib year idea) of the 70th week or not, they still do go into heaven after they are raised alive.

Exactly!



The two witness ascended into heaven - anabesan - ascended - rather than were raptured - harpadzo - caught up. Different words.

And the 3.5 days is in the text.

We need to pay close attention to the words.

Much love!

Mark

Does the scripture say that the "Dead in Christ shall RISE First, or be Raptured First mark?
Yes, we do need to pay close attention to the words. That's why I used the word ascend.

They Ascended after their death...Just as ALL the others in Christ who have died before them....they will Ascend into heaven.

It is only those who Have Not Yet Died who will be Caught up/Raptured.

[shorttribber]

Mark, please explain the great difference in these two phrases...

"And after these things I saw....."
"After this I looked......"

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

How about trying to answer the question as it is first? First try to answer without the need to see the context.....I've asked the question the way I have for a reason.

[mark s]

By the way mark....regarding this part of Rev 4:

13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.



the following text answers how Rev 4:13 is to be understood....
Romans
17As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” — He is our father in the presence of God, in whom he believed, the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being what does not yet exist.


King James Bible
(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.


it does not mean, for the sake of keeping things sequential..........

It may be that there will be a very weird moment for the sinners in the worlds as every molecule in creation unites in praise for the creator. Or something else.

I will stick with what is in agreement with Romans 4:17...it is a prophetic utterance and is not meant to be understood as sequential.

My point is that I'd rather admit I don't necessarily understand the full significance of a passage than to claim that it means something it does not say. I just don't do that without a Scriptural reason. And not just that some place else something else meant something else. The only reasons I see clear to accept are where the Scripture says, this is a symbol, and this is what the symbol means. Anything outside of that lacks Scriptural authority.

If we want to become subjective in our understandings, where will it end?

Much love!
mark

[mark s]

Mark, please explain the great difference in these two phrases...

"And after these things I saw....."
"After this I looked......"

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

How about trying to answer the question as it is first? First try to answer without the need to see the context.....I've asked the question the way I have for a reason.

Yes, I understand that.

I'm discussing Scripture, not just bandying about words. If we are to exposit Scripture, then please post the Scripture.

I don't think this is a discussion about expositing Scripture. Where is the proof that I'm wrong?

[shorttribber]

So then, your objection is that since the passage describing the two witness appears in the text after the passages of the trumpets, the witness can only appear after the trumpets themselves.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying.

I'm not trying to discuss viewpoints here so much as I'm discussing the words of the text of Scripture, and what they are saying.

So am I.

There are two issues with that.

Moot point....since that is not what I'm saying

Consider, In Revelation 16:15, we read, "Behold, I am coming like a thief". Jesus speaking? In Revelation 22:20 the matter is put to rest. "I am coming quickly." Amen, even so, come Lord Jesus. He is the coming one. But in Revelation 16:15, this is after the "bowls of wrath", in them, God fills up His anger. Then, in Revelation 22:20, this is after the new creation. I would consider it evident that Jesus is not delaying His return until after the new creation. If after the bowls, that argues for post-trib post-wrath, the primary early church position, at least, as far as extant writings show.An hermeneutic cannot rely solely on placement within the text. While that is very important, distinction should be made between passages that each contain their own timing information. If we use the timing information contained within the relevant passages, and harmonization with other passages, then the matter becomes clear in my opinion.

Agreed

One is that it is a faulty hermeneutic.

The moot point above negates the idea of a faulty hermeneutic on my part.

The second issue is that in this particular instance you end up with a serious conflict.

Again a moot point

If the two witnesses prophesy during the final 3.5 years, your "short trib", then where the Bible says the beast is given power over the saints, it actually means only some of the saints, the witnesses are excluded. I don't see that in the text, and I'd be very reluctant to add to the words of this prophecy.

Tell me mark, where in the text does it say the AC is given power over ALL the Saints?

I don't see that in the text, and I'd be very reluctant to add to the words of this prophecy.

It's not in the text is it mark? We don't read in the text where he is given power over ALL the saints, correct?
I do know that you do not want to add to the words of prophecy, none of us do.

And what about where it says that if anyone tries to harm the witnesses, they will die by fire coming from their mouths? Is the beast exempt? I don't see that either.

Yes, because the beast has been given that Authority/Power/ Ability from God to fulfill the short time that the beast has....to do as he will, unharmed till the end. And the word "anyone" is to be understood in the same manner as "All" as in he causeth "All" to receive the mark...when we know that "All" do not.

In other words, "Anyone" or "All" are to be understood in the Common Limited sense.

If the two witnesses are killed by the beast, lay in the streets of Jerusalem for 3.5 days, while the earth dwellers party and send presents, how does this square with the fact - in this timeline, a short-trib where all this occurs in the same 3.5 years - how does partying and exchanging presents because the witnesses are dead square with the fact that this would be after Jesus' return, at the end of the 3.5 years?

They rise Before the literal return of Christ mark.....Before the Bowls Wrath of God is poured out.
The Wrath of God is only poured out SOMETIME AFTER the 1,260 days.....it will be poured out SOMETIME BEFORE the 1,290th day.

There is no conflict.

These two scenarios just don't seem to line up to me. Any thoughts on these inconsistencies?

There is no conflict or inconsistencies in the shorttrib position.

[mark s]

Editing this in........
How is it that you do not believe them to be raptured or caught up after their death? The text says they do ascend into heaven ? ? whether it is three days into some second portion (according to your 7 trib year idea) of the 70th week or not, they still do go into heaven after they are raised alive.

Exactly!



The two witness ascended into heaven - anabesan - ascended - rather than were raptured - harpadzo - caught up. Different words.

And the 3.5 days is in the text.

We need to pay close attention to the words.

Much love!

Mark

Does the scripture say that the "Dead in Christ shall RISE First, or be Raptured First mark?
Yes, we do need to pay close attention to the words. That's why I used the word ascend.

They Ascended after their death...Just as ALL the others in Christ who have died before them....they will Ascend into heaven.

It is only those who Have Not Yet Died who will be Caught up/Raptured.

You said "raptured". The text does not say that. This is my point. Substituting words in Scripture doesn't work for me. But I've become used to people doing it. I have certain theories about that.

BTW . . . the dead in Christ and the alive remained both together are caught up - harpadzo. The dead in Christ rise first (anastesontai - different word than anabete - the first meaning standing up, the second, stepping up), then, with them, we are all caught up together.

English Standard Version
17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

Authorized King James Version
17 then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Young's Literal Translation:
17 then we who are living, who are remaining over, together with them shall be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in air, and so always with the Lord we shall be;

So we are all caught up together. But it doesn't say that about the witnesses.

Much love!
Mark

[Jay Ross]

Hello

How we get muddled up in our understanding because of the order that John saw the events.

Consider the following picture: -

John is place on a tapestry of End Time events with then in the sequences of them occurring, but he is placed on the tapestry at the place where the last judgement is depicted and he begins to walk back in time across the tapestry to where the first recorded judgement is depicted on the tapestry. So, John records the sequence in which he see the judgements come into view for him, not necessarily in the order that they will occur.


It is my understanding that God revealed the various judgements in the reverse order for John to record.


So this is the last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the second last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the third last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the fourth last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the fifth last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the sixth last event before the final Judgement occurs.
So this is the seventh last event before the final Judgement occurs.

Now some of these recorded events also overlap each other. For example let us look at Chapter 16 of the Book of Revelations with the understanding mentioned above.

Before I begin to present the Bowl judgements, let me make a comment about the Greek word based on the Greek Root G:4578 which has the following meaning:

G:4578 σεισμός seismos (sice-mos'); from G:4579; a commotion, i.e. (of the air) a gale, (of the ground) an earthquake: –– KJV - earthquake, tempest.

G:4579 σείω seio (si'-o); apparently a primary verb; to rock (vibrate, properly, sideways or to and fro), i.e. (generally) to agitate (in any direction; cause to tremble); figuratively, to throw into a tremor (of fear or concern): –– KJV - move, quake, shake.

As indicated above it is usually translated as "earthquake" in the KJV, but in reality it is better to understand the meaning of this Greek work as "turmoil" Such that when we read the following passage we should replace the word "earthquake" with the word "turmoil" to make sense of what has been written.

Revelation 16:17-21: - Seventh Bowl: The Earth Utterly Shaken

17 Then the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, "It is done!" 18 And there were noises and thunderings and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake/{turmoil/commotion}, such a mighty and great earthquake/{{turmoil/commotion} as had not occurred since men were on the earth. 19 Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And great Babylon was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath. 20 Then every island fled away, and the mountains were not found. 21 And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent. Men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, since that plague was exceedingly great.

In understanding the "great earthquake/{turmoil/commotion}" that was among the men of the earth, the "great earthquake/{turmoil/commotion}" had not occurred since men had been on the earth up and until that time.

The event being described in this prophectic passage are the events that occurred around World War One.

1st sign: - Now the great city was divided into three parts,
Jerusalem was divided into three administrated areas controlled by Britain, Jordan and the League of Nations.

2nd sign: - the cities of the nations fell.
The nations around Jerusalem at that time were over ran by The Australian and British armies and their cities were taken/fell in the conflicts.

3rd sign: - great Babylon was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath.
A new nation was created to live in the ancient homeland of the Chaldeans. It was remembered by the controlling nations before God and the devastated and desolated land was revitalised once more after approximately 2,000 years of lying idle.

4th sign: - every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.

5th sign: - And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent. Men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, since that plague was exceedingly great
Artiliary shells, about the weight of a talent was used during WW1 to rain down on the opposition by both sides in the WW1 battles. The men in the trenches on the western front certianly cursed the bombardments of shells.

Revelation 16:12-16: - Sixth Bowl: Euphrates Dried Up

12 Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared. 13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

15 "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame."

16 And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon.

Now this Bowl Judgement started long before the 7th Bowl judgement. It start when the Baal Worship receeded because of the spread of Christianity in the first A.D. centuries and finished when Islam took hold in these same regions and the Euprates River, which has been used here as symbolic of the Ball religious worship dried up which has allowed the three kings, from the eastern side of the Euphrates River, i.e. Satan, the four faceted beast and the false prophet, the little horn, a means to march towards Jerusalem at some stage in our distant future.


The passage then begins to describe three fowl frog like spirits which came out of the mouths of Satan, the beast and the False Prophet who go out to the whole earth to perform signs and wonders, which we have already witnessed in our near past, to begin the process of drawing the nations to Armageddon, in our near future, where the Kings of the Earth are to be judged and then imprisoned with the wicked fallen heavenly hosts, i.e. Satan, the four beasts of Daniel 7:1-12 and the Little horn in the cisten, i.e. the bottomless pit for 1,000 years. Now this passage, also overlaps what we are told in Revelation 12 and 20 in part.

Now there is a 1,000 or so year lull before we get to the 5th Bowl Judgement which occurs after Satan has marched into Jerusalem to establish His kingdom.

Revelation 16:10-11: - Fifth Bowl: Darkness and Pain

10 Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom became full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues because of the pain. 11 They blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and did not repent of their deeds.

Which is then followed by the 4th Bowl Judgement: -

Revelation 16:8-9: - Fourth Bowl: Men Are Scorched

8 Then the fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and power was given to him to scorch men with fire. 9 And men were scorched with great heat, and they blasphemed the name of God who has power over these plagues; and they did not repent and give Him glory.

Which is then followedd by the 3rd Bowl Judgement: -

Revelation 16:4-7: - Third Bowl: The Waters Turn to Blood

4 Then the third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. 5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying:

"You are righteous, O Lord,
The One who is and who was and who is to be,
Because You have judged these things.
6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets,
And You have given them blood to drink.
For it is their just due."

7 And I heard another from the altar saying, "Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are Your judgments."

Which is followed by the 2nd Bowl judgement: -

Revelations 16:3: - Second Bowl: The Sea Turns to Blood

3 Then the second angel poured out his bowl on the sea, and it became blood as of a dead man; and every living creature in the sea died.

And then finally the 1st Bowl judgement: -

Revelation 16:2: - First Bowl: Loathsome Sores

2 So the first went and poured out his bowl upon the earth, and a foul and loathsome sore came upon the men who had the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image.

Now the last four Bowl judgements will occur in rapid succession over a period of around 20 or so years after Satan, the wicked fallen heavenly hosts and the kings and their armies are all released from the bottomles pit after the passing of 1,000 years.


Perhaps it is best that I stop for the moment to allow people time to digest what I have posted.


Shalom

[mark s]

So then, your objection is that since the passage describing the two witness appears in the text after the passages of the trumpets, the witness can only appear after the trumpets themselves.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying.

OK.

Please, what are you saying?

[shorttribber]

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

The simple answer should be....

There does not seem to be any difference much in what those few words mean...they seem to be very much the same.

that is the answer mark. And only by posting the texts they are in do you find your reasons for saying their meaning is different.

In other words, what you have been taught, or what you have yourself learned about the context is based on how you will perceive those few words,

How about trying to answer the question as it is first? First try to answer without the need to see the context.....I've asked the question the way I have for a reason.[/quote]

Yes, I understand that.

I'm discussing Scripture, not just bandying about words. If we are to exposit Scripture, then please post the Scripture.

I don't think this is a discussion about expositing Scripture. Where is the proof that I'm wrong?[/quote]

[mark s]

One is that it is a faulty hermeneutic.

The moot point above negates the idea of a faulty hermeneutic on my part.

The second issue is that in this particular instance you end up with a serious conflict.

Again a moot point

If the two witnesses prophesy during the final 3.5 years, your "short trib", then where the Bible says the beast is given power over the saints, it actually means only some of the saints, the witnesses are excluded. I don't see that in the text, and I'd be very reluctant to add to the words of this prophecy.

Tell me mark, where in the text does it say the AC is given power over ALL the Saints?

(all from Young's Literal Translation)

Revelation 13:7
and there was given to it to make war with the saints, and to overcome them, and there was given to it authority over every tribe, and tongue, and nation.

"the saints" - inclusive "overcome them" - inclusive. And in case you still weren't sure . . . every tribe tongue nation.

Revelation 13:15
and there was given to it to give a spirit to the image of the beast, that also the image of the beast may speak, and [that] it may cause as many as shall not bow before the image of the beast, that they may be killed.

As many as don't bow down. Do you see the witnesses bowing down?

Daniel 7:24-25
And the ten horns out of the kingdom [are] ten kings, they rise, and another doth rise after them, and it is diverse from the former, and three kings it humbleth; and words as an adversary of the Most High it doth speak, and the saints of the Most High it doth wear out, and it hopeth to change seasons and law; and they are given into its hand, till a time, and times, and a division of a time.

"the saints", again, inclusive. Not "most the saints", "some of the saints", almost all the saints . . . "they are giving into it's hand . . ." What a horror!

Put those cookies back! Yes, all of them!

Much love!
mark

[mark s]

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

The simple answer should be....

Showing the contexts to the Scriptures you want discuss.

We can lift out a few words here and there, and hypothesize about the differences or similarities, but until you use them in a context, it doesn't mean anything.

I should think my movie example would have shown that.

Again, if you want to exposit Scripture, let's do that.

Much love!
Mark

[shorttribber]

You said "raptured". The text does not say that.

I said Raptured, or ascend...that is what many understand as the rising up of the two....not me specificly....I should have made that clear though.

I was using the term that I thought you believed and many do, not me.

BTW . . . the dead in Christ and the alive remained both together are caught up - harpadzo. The dead in Christ rise first (anastesontai - different word than anabete - the first meaning standing up, the second, stepping up), then, with them, we are all caught up together.English Standard Version17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.Authorized King James Version17 then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

no mark, it says the dead in Christ shall RISE first......then We which are alive and remain will be Caught up Together

Those alive are Caught up TOGETHER to meet them in the air. Those alive are Gathered TOGETHER to meet Them As the Dead RISE FIRST.

So we are all caught up together. But it doesn't say that about the witnesses.

I think the wording can be understood either way really...I do see the dead rising first as an ascension rather than a Catching away out of the grave...since the word Rise is specifically mentioned.

[mark s]

Context please.

Thank you!

Much love!
Mark

The simple answer should be....

There does not seem to be any difference much in what those few words mean...they seem to be very much the same.

that is the answer mark. And only by posting the texts they are in do you find your reasons for saying their meaning is different.

In other words, what you have been taught, or what you have yourself learned about the context is based on how you will perceive those few words,

That's a rather limiting view, don't you think?

Wouldn't we be better for using the word meanings as a starting point, then consider the syntax of the words - the part of grammar - then consider the immediate context to see what words may affect our understanding, then compare to other Scriptures to see that we have harmony?

This is what I mean when I speak of using Scripture to define Scripture. Lot's more work, but the payoff is worthwhile.

Certainly you understand how context makes a difference, don't you?

I made a killing in the market. I was killing in Vietnam. My foot is killing me! Three uses of the exact same word, each with a completely different meaning, only knowable by context.

Much love,
Mark

[shorttribber]

One is that it is a faulty hermeneutic.

The moot point above negates the idea of a faulty hermeneutic on my part.

The second issue is that in this particular instance you end up with a serious conflict.

Again a moot point

If the two witnesses prophesy during the final 3.5 years, your "short trib", then where the Bible says the beast is given power over the saints, it actually means only some of the saints, the witnesses are excluded. I don't see that in the text, and I'd be very reluctant to add to the words of this prophecy.

Tell me mark, where in the text does it say the AC is given power over ALL the Saints?

(all from Young's Literal Translation)

Revelation 13:7
and there was given to it to make war with the saints, and to overcome them, and there was given to it authority over every tribe, and tongue, and nation.

"the saints" - inclusive "overcome them" - inclusive. And in case you still weren't sure . . . every tribe tongue nation.

Revelation 13:15
and there was given to it to give a spirit to the image of the beast, that also the image of the beast may speak, and [that] it may cause as many as shall not bow before the image of the beast, that they may be killed.

As many as don't bow down. Do you see the witnesses bowing down?

Daniel 7:24-25
And the ten horns out of the kingdom [are] ten kings, they rise, and another doth rise after them, and it is diverse from the former, and three kings it humbleth; and words as an adversary of the Most High it doth speak, and the saints of the Most High it doth wear out, and it hopeth to change seasons and law; and they are given into its hand, till a time, and times, and a division of a time.

"the saints", again, inclusive. Not "most the saints", "some of the saints", almost all the saints . . . "they are giving into it's hand . . ." What a horror!

Put those cookies back! Yes, all of them!

Much love!
mark

Not so, I do not see that it is all inclusive. because I wear out cars does not mean I wear out ALL cars. And it doesn't matter if they are from All nations.

Again, I will compare the action of the AC to cause "ALL" to receive the mark....but "All" do not.

It's that simple mark.

Ain't putting the cookies back....because the rule still stands.....not All inclusive because you say it is.


my spelling is terrible....had to correct a bunch...always do..

[mark s]

You said "raptured". The text does not say that.

I said Raptured, or ascend...that is what many understand as the rising up of the two....not me specificly....I should have made that clear though.

I was using the term that I thought you believed and many do, not me.

You said raptured, that's what I'm working with.

Raptured is something that happens to you, ascend is something you do. I just don't swap words unless they truly mean the same thing. And that's a phenomenon that happens in English much more often that Koine Greek, which is a very precise language.

BTW . . . the dead in Christ and the alive remained both together are caught up - harpadzo. The dead in Christ rise first (anastesontai - different word than anabete - the first meaning standing up, the second, stepping up), then, with them, we are all caught up together.English Standard Version17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.Authorized King James Version17 then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

no mark, it says the dead in Christ shall RISE first......then We which are alive and remain will be Caught up Together

Those alive are Caught up TOGETHER to me them in the air. Those alive are Gathered TOGETHER to met Them As the Dead RISE FIRST.

Check the passage. We are caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air.

So we are all caught up together. But it doesn't say that about the witnesses.

I think the wording can be understood either way really...I do see the dead rising first as an ascension rather than a Catching away out of the grave...since the word Rise is specifically mentioned.[/quote]

The dead rise, and with them, we are all caught up together. Words have meanings, and if we substitute words that do not mean the same, we change the meaning of Scripture. I like to avoid that at all costs.

Can be understood either way? Based on what? Why would I think that would be true? Why would I not think that God chose His Words with purpose?

Much love!
Mark

[Jay Ross]

Mark

Using your movie analogy, a good movie jumps around in time to build the context of the story telling. They are often not sequential, particularly when different events overlap each other. The deal with one event and then go back in time to the beginning of the other event that occurred at the same time and then tell that story. Many a good novel is written in the same manner. It is the art of telling the story.

What makes it confusing is when people try and force a parallel story line into a sequential storyline.

Sadly that is what often happens in explaining the Book of Revelation. Something, it seems to me, that you hold onto dearly.


Shalom.

[mark s]

Not so, I do not see that I is all inclusive. because I wear out cars does not mean I wear out ALL cars. And it doesn't matter if they are from All nations.

Again, I will compare the action of the AC to cause "ALL" to receive the mark....but "All" do not.

It's that simple mark.

Ain't putting the cookies back....because the rule still stands.....not All inclusive because you say it is.

You dropped a word, to make the meaning fit.

"I wear out cars" lacks an article. Apples and oranges.

"He is given power over saints" is a different statement from "he is given power over the saints".

I ate cookies. Are there cookies left? Maybe. How many were there? How many did I eat? Unknown. The answer is indefinite. We don't know.

Add a definite article, "the".

I ate the cookies. Are there cookies left? No! I ate them. Suddenly it becomes definitive.

The mark . . . "and whoever does not . . .", it's in the text.

Much love,



Mark

[shorttribber]

I stand by the first rule I said by the use of the word "All", can't get much more inclusive than that....but it's not absolutely inclusive.


much love to you too mark....gotta run

[shorttribber]

Also...I pray for "The" Saints....does that mean I pray for every single one...because I use the word "The"?

[mark s]

Mark

Using your movie analogy, a good movie jumps around in time to build the context of the story telling. They are often not sequential, particularly when different events overlap each other. The deal with one event and then go back in time to the beginning of the other event that occurred at the same time and then tell that story. Many a good novel is written in the same manner. It is the art of telling the story.

What makes it confusing is when people try and force a parallel story line into a sequential storyline.

Sadly that is what often happens in explaining the Book of Revelation. Something, it seems to me, that you hold onto dearly.


Shalom.

I don't really see the vision of the Revelation as being the same genre as Hollywood, or the best seller list. Of course, the Bible is annually the best seller of all! They just don't want to say it!

Kurt Vonnegut Jr. was horrible about that, particularly Slaughterhouse 5, a horrible book, I don't recommend it, but his timeline is all skewed. It's hard to tell what's being presented as present, what as flashbacks, what is fantasy as he tries to survive the horror (fire-bombing of Dresden, Germany), and what is yet future. Vonnegut is all over the place.

I've seen movies that start at the end, and work their way backwards. Movies that start in the middle of a repeating time loop. Movies where the son goes back in time to before the his dad got there so he wouldn't be killed, and thus rescued his family, and thus made it so that dad never was killed, so son never had to go back . . . real mind benders! I love that kind of story. My wife hates them!

But I think God wants for us to be able to base our understanding entirely on the text.

Much love!
Mark

[mark s]

I stand by the first rule I said by the use of the word "All", can't get much more inclusive than that....but it's not absolutely inclusive.


much love to you too mark....gotta run

Not sure what rule you mean.

I go by Koine Greek rules of grammar. And in general, they line up pretty good with the English.

"The dead in Christ rise first."

All of the dead in Christ? Or some of them? How should we understand this?

Just one more simple little question . . .

Much love!
Mark

[Jay Ross]

Mark you may like to back track to my post today at 8:06 am, AEST, Australian time, where I listed out the Bowl judgements in the reverse order, and they make much more sense of the unfolding story of Revelation 16.

The seven bowl judgements are not in sequential order as you want to impress on others. I would contend that your order of events in revelation is suspect.

Shalom


The post was posted around 2 hrs 11 minutes before this post.

[mark s]

Hi Jay,

The thing of it is, the only method of interpretation that I have found that carries Scriptural authority is to take it exactly as written. So when it says the 3rd angel poured out it's bowl, and then the 4th poured out it's bowl, that's that way I understand it. For me to say, but that doesn't make sense, would be a sure sign to me - to me, OK? - a sign to me that there is something I'm not understanding. If the passage is that straightforward. No reflection on you, I know you have your way.

Much love!
Mark

Added to say . . . I did read your post, and saw what you were doing in the order. Just to let you know.

[Jay Ross]

Hi Jay,

The thing of it is, the only method of interpretation that I have found that carries Scriptural authority is to take it exactly as written. So when it says the 3rd angel poured out it's bowl, and then the 4th poured out it's bowl, that's that way I understand it. For me to say, but that doesn't make sense, would be a sure sign to me - to me, OK? - a sign to me that there is something I'm not understanding. If the passage is that straightforward. No reflection on you, I know you have your way.

Much love!
Mark

Added to say . . . I did read your post, and saw what you were doing in the order. Just to let you know.

Mark, if I was to follow your logic, then I will be waiting a very long time to see the first bowl judgement begin and will not be looking for the other six bowl judgements or recognise them when they happen.

That is why many have missed the 7th Bowl Judgement which occurred around 100 years ago.

That is why many are missing the 6th Bowl judgement that is occurring now in our lifetime as we await the end of the this present age when the wicked heavenly hosts are judged in heaven and the Gentile Kings of the earth are judged on the earth at Armageddon.

Your statement, "the only method of interpretation that I have found that carries Scriptural authority is to take it exactly as written," means that the Genesis 15:16 prophecy, which was fulfilled in 1948, in the fourth age of the existence of the nation of Israel is misconstrued to be a prophecy about the exodus of Israel from Egypt in the 4th descendant generation of Abraham's descendants be3cause they have twisted God's prophecy to have a meaning that they can understand and use scripture to justify even though the Genesis 15:13-14 prophecy has God actively involved in bring the nation of Israel out of Egypt, while the Genesis 15:16 prophecy does not mention any involvement of God in the descendants of Abraham returning to the Land of Canaan.

So by claiming that your understanding of a passage has Scriptural authority because you take the passage as read by your understanding is the only way to understand scripture.

To me the claim of scriptural authority is what the Pharisees and scribes of Jesus' day used to justify their actions and we know that they really did miss the first advent of Christ because they were looking for the wrong type of Messiah based on their understanding of scripture.

The question that you have raised is: - "Who really does have that type of scriptural authority to read and understand God's prophetic word?"

Now where in scripture does it support your proposition of scriptural authority in the manner that you are suggesting.

Now in what I am posting, I am not trying to predict when the "rapture" of the saints to meet Christ in the air will occur as to whether it is pre, post, mid or whatever. All that I am trying to do is to present the right order in which the Biblical events will occur without prejudice or a pre conditioning bias.

All that I am attempting to do is to place the various end time events upon a timeline that makes sense. It is difficult to do using your logic.

Shalom

[mark s]

Your statement, "the only method of interpretation that I have found that carries Scriptural authority is to take it exactly as written," means that the Genesis 15:16 prophecy, which was fulfilled in 1948, in the fourth age of the existence of the nation of Israel is misconstrued to be a prophecy about the exodus of Israel from Egypt in the 4th descendant generation of Abraham's descendants be3cause they have twisted God's prophecy to have a meaning that they can understand and use scripture to justify even though the Genesis 15:13-14 prophecy has God actively involved in bring the nation of Israel out of Egypt, while the Genesis 15:16 prophecy does not mention any involvement of God in the descendants of Abraham returning to the Land of Canaan.

Hi Jay,

On this part, actually, I'd argue that my statement meaning is limited to describing a method of interpretation, and does not speak towards the specific interpretation of any particular passage.

So by claiming that your understanding of a passage has Scriptural authority because you take the passage as read by your understanding is the only way to understand scripture.

I don't claim that my understanding has Scriptural authority. I claim that this is how I seek to obtain understanding.

The question that you have raised is: - "Who really does have that type of scriptural authority to read and understand God's prophetic word?"

Not really to me. I'm simply pointing to what I feel to be the valid way to understand the Bible, without diverging into non-Scripture means.

Now where in scripture does it support your proposition of scriptural authority in the manner that you are suggesting.

No where in the Bible does it support reading the text in American English, and yet that is what I do. I define "agapeo" not by English definitions of love, but by examining every place in Scripture where it is used. How it is used, by whom, to what end, and so on. Everything I can know about every place the word is used. I know you do much the same.

I define glory in the same way, and walk away with what I believe is the Biblical meaning of Glory. So when someone asks me about glory, what it is, how we obtain it, whatever, I can just point to those passages which define it for me. So I don't use mine or your definition, I use what God says about it.

Maybe a simple example is Biblical hope. Romans 5 says, "hope does not disappoint." So there is a Biblically authoritative property of hope. It is certain what is coming, what is hoped for. Hope does not disappoint.

Now in what I am posting, I am not trying to predict when the "rapture" of the saints to meet Christ in the air will occur as to whether it is pre, post, mid or whatever. All that I am trying to do is to present the right order in which the Biblical events will occur without prejudice or a pre conditioning bias.

All that I am attempting to do is to place the various end time events upon a timeline that makes sense. It is difficult to do using your logic.

Shalom

Understood. We're not really on the same page on this one. In fact, one might even say, where one so bold as to do so, that we are coming at this from completely different directions!



Much love!
mark

[mark s]

Mark,
Your words here....

Even if we don't seem to understand the sense of what He is saying, "but how can all a fallen creation praise God? It MUST be later" we should never try to change it. No matter what the size font.Even in this example, if you follow through the objection to its logical conclusion, how, in fact, can a fallen creation praise God?? This then could only be fulfilled in the New Creation. But that's not the assertion. So there must be more to it than meets the eye! Maybe something we don't understand. But that doesn't give us permission to change it. I will change myself before changing God's Word.

Seem very much to be saying this....

while it would seem to mean this . . . if you just read it . . . well, it actually should be understood as something different . . . yes, it says this, but it means that. You have to just know.

No. It is different. Is that not clearly seen? It's actually the exact opposite.

There are those who change the Word to suit themselves. I prefer to change myself to suit the Word.

In this instance you assume that what the verse says cannot happen within the apparent time frame. Either something is misunderstood about the time frame, or something is misunderstood about what can and cannot happen. I simply do not make any assumptions. I go with what I read.

If it says that all creation praises God, and this is a fallen creation described, then I figure somehow that just must be possible.

You wrote:

You can claim that I am suggesting some intellectual dishonesty, but I'm not. What I am saying is your simple unwillingness to think otherwise.
That is not dishonesty, that is just simply unwise.

Call it what you want, it doesn't change what it is.

"You are unwilling to think otherwise." Right. Back that up if you can. You cannot. This is false, pejorative, and insulting. You are telling me my motives and you do not know me.

And the fact is, the matter of "being unwilling to think otherwise" implies the ability to do so, and even the reason to do so, the only thing preventing such "otherwise thinking", which, I might add, I think means "your thinking", is my unwillingness to do so.

And that is intellectual dishonesty, the advocacy of a position either known to be false, or suspected to be false but without concern for verification.

Why do I need to explain this?

And are you not "casting aspersions?"

You say . . ."Seem very much to be saying this . . . "

So. Seems very much? To who? To you? To others? Or IS very much? Seems . . . or, is . . . each are very different. I believe you choose your words carefully.

Which, shorttribber? Seems to you like I'm changing the meaning of the text without cause? As others do? Please. No. Forget the please.

You've once again implied intellectual dishonesty on my part.

Back that up.

Seems to be? Or is? Trying to throw doubt? Make me look bad? Or . . . you have an actual point to make,that I am changing the meaning?

Show it to us.

You continue to claim that I make it up as I go along, in so many words.

That I just come up with my own interpretations out of thin air, as it were. Simply assuming this means that, like so many people do.

You continue to produce as your "evidence" lists of passages with which you've found disagreement with others, and now you throw them at me attempting to drag me into the fray, so you can "prove your point".

Yet what you've also continued to do is to use this as if it were relevant, while sidestepping - not addressing - my questions and responses.

I'm used to my questions not being answered. People generally don't like to try to answer when they can't. The beauty of humility is that I couldn't care less were I to discover I'm mistaken on some point. It simply means I've gained.

This is why it's such an hysterical joke with me when people accuse me of intellectual dishonesty, clinging to beliefs though I know they are wrong, or knowing my support is faulty, or refusing to consider another view, trust me, over the years, first at another forum, and then here, I feel like I've pretty much heard it all.

What I laugh!! I don't really want to know. Right! Anyone who even thinks that knows absolutely nothing about me.

Even when I first came to God, I was convinced we were all "god", wild and unexplainable things were happening in my life, but I was confronted with the prophecies, and realized the Bible was true. I didn't like that one bit, trust me on this at least!

I resisted yielding, but I knew it was true. So a Christian I became. I haven't changed since. I simply want to know what's true.

You throw out at me all these passages, what say you about this, what say you about that, while not answering the even simple questions I ask you. Simple questions in a simple way. I feel like it's an attempt to try to trip me up so that attention is removed from all the unanswered posts.

You've accused me of misrepresenting your view, probably without really knowing just how much care I take before I post in disagreement.

I want to be very certain that I've understood you correctly, and am actually being responsive, that is, addressing your comment or question.

And these accusations proved to be without merit.

You may notice that even when I've pointed out that your "response" is actually non-responsive, not addressing my previous post, I've then gone on to respond to your diversion, for the sake of completeness, and in good faith for the reader, to have an answer to everything.. But I believe you are posting these things, again, to avoid answering that which you wish to avoid.

Myself, I hold myself to a rule, that if I make an assertion, it needs to be supported, and as often as needed. If I find I cannot support an assertion, I need to consider whether to withdraw the assertion, as I have at times, or to simply reconsider it. Perhaps if I can't support it, I'm wrong.

There. You can use that. Mark S said "I'm wrong".

I'm sorry, I've said too much already. I'm tired of these conversations. They repeat and they repeat and they repeat over and over with much weariness and little if any fruitfulness. When I ask you for Scripture to support an assertion, you as often as not, or at least so it seems to me, either change the subject, or get personal. Or say, it's all so much, too much to post. I try to return to it, you will not.

When I give Scripture, and my interpretation, you assert, it doesn't mean that, but without showing from Scripture that it means something else. And that often times being, it doesn't actually mean what it says. You have to understand it this way . . .

I'm a simple guy with simple ideas. What God says is true. You don't have to be either a rocket scientist, a poet, or a mystic to understand it.

OK. I'm going back to . . . I've said too much already.

Please show me where I - myself, not another - has substituted one meaning for another without a Biblical reason to do so. "It says this, but it means that." And if you should find one, it will provide me opportunity to gain, to grow. And otherwise it may show you something.

Let's take this for example:

Those who overlap trumpets and seals, the trumpets are not handed to the angels until after the seals are opened.

Can an event be foretold in a book, in an Introduction/preface/Overview BEFORE That Event occurs in real Time?

Yes, that is exactly how an Overview or intro works mark. And That is what the seals are...An Overview of the Whole space time as it pertains to the Battles and final Victory of Christ and the Church.

Of course, you think otherwise...but that's ok...must do other things now.

If I give me son a piece of cake at 7 pm tonight, how can he eat that cake at 5 pm today?

And if the seventh seal provides the angels with their trumpets, by what right can we change the sequence into something else?

Call it an overview, a father will give his son some cake, which he will eat. That can be an overview, but it does not change the fact - fact - that the the angels were not even given the trumpets until after the seals are opened. Overview, intro, preface, call it what you want.

That which is lacking cannot be numbered. - Solomon

Angels can't sound trumpets they do not have.

What I think is insignificant. But if we cannot understand such simple statements in Scripture, how will we ever understand the more difficult? How much simpler can it be? I gave all of my sons some money, and they went to the ice cream parlor for treats. Wait. One went and bought his treat before I gave him the money. OH, look at that! They all did!

I guess that's the marvel of quantum physics!

Much love!
Mark