Sorry, but no. John was called up to heaven and saw A VISION. A vision can be of the past, present or future or all mixed together. We determine the time IN THE VISION by what was SEEN in the vision.
By the way, "I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. "
Do you see an "only" here as if God is saying He is going to show John ONLY future events?" I have searched diligently and cannot find an ONLY there anywhere - leaving God free to INCLUDE some past tense events - which He did.
"Until out of the midst he becomes" does not fit in Rev. 4:1. It is in 2 Thes. 2 concerning the departing of the church. Rev. 4:1 is concerning only JOHN around 95 AD.
Yes, it is true, after the church has departed, THEN the man of sin will be revealed. But you are mistaken in tying that verse in with John being caught up to heaven. Why not drop such sloppy exegesis and just believe what John is saying: HE was caught up in 95 AD. It has nothing to do with the church being caught up. EVERY posttribber and prewrather KNOWS THIS. Why don't you know it?
Just so you will know, John used "after this" or "after these things" 6 times in Revelation; each time as a transitional phrase to show the the vision God was showing him changes subjects. Case in point? God had dictated messages to the 7 churches, but then the FOCUS of the vision changed: God called John up so WE could have Revelation to read.
Let's stick close to what John actually wrote - shall we?
By the way, "I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. "
Do you see an "only" here as if God is saying He is going to show John ONLY future events?" I have searched diligently and cannot find an ONLY there anywhere - leaving God free to INCLUDE some past tense events - which He did.
"Until out of the midst he becomes" does not fit in Rev. 4:1. It is in 2 Thes. 2 concerning the departing of the church. Rev. 4:1 is concerning only JOHN around 95 AD.
Yes, it is true, after the church has departed, THEN the man of sin will be revealed. But you are mistaken in tying that verse in with John being caught up to heaven. Why not drop such sloppy exegesis and just believe what John is saying: HE was caught up in 95 AD. It has nothing to do with the church being caught up. EVERY posttribber and prewrather KNOWS THIS. Why don't you know it?
Just so you will know, John used "after this" or "after these things" 6 times in Revelation; each time as a transitional phrase to show the the vision God was showing him changes subjects. Case in point? God had dictated messages to the 7 churches, but then the FOCUS of the vision changed: God called John up so WE could have Revelation to read.
Let's stick close to what John actually wrote - shall we?
Jesus is both God and man.
You can not say that John went 30 years back in time and wept.
Or that No man existed until after John finished weeping.
Jesus is both a man, God, a lamb, a lion, and the being John saw on patmos.
The " worthy" part is the kinsman redeemer.
In ruth only Boaz or the one ahead if Him, another relative in line before Boaz, could REDEEM THE PROPERTY. "WORTHY".
Kinsman redeemer.
Not savior of the world.
The seals have nothing to do with salvation
In ruth, the lineage mattered IN REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY.
NOT a security of birthright.
Iow Naomi was still family and Jewess.
RUTH became family at the consummation with Boaz or a seporate document.
You are thinking " worthy due to the cross"
That dynamic is INDIRECT.
Kinsman redeemer being the direct and main component of The God man revealed as the one worthy.
Not that if you remove the neccessary component of your model " that Time went backwards to the crucifixion" , it changes that entire model.
It is as if you ask the body of Christ to walk up to the grand canyon and jump to the other side because God told you personally to do just that.
I can not buy it.
Jesus was there all along.
He became worthy as he became the God man.
But he called himself son of man.
So when did he "become" Boaz ( worthy)?
Was it at your time frame?
Was it in Gods?
The bible says Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world.
We can think stuff fits and be 100% wrong