When did (will) Jesus open the first seal in Rev. 6 and what does it represent?
- Thread starter lamad
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I may be mistaken, but it seems one of you is speaking of v.6 (PERFECT participle)... the other of you is speaking of v.9 (AORIST indicative).
Perhaps y'all could get on the same page.
Perhaps y'all could get on the same page.
Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
We are discussing the verb tense of the word slain in this verse. It is in the perfect tense, past tense in English.
The scripture actually says the following:
"And all who dwell on the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb who was slain."
Its meaning is the same as Rev.17:8 below:
"And those who dwell on the earth whose names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world will marvel when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet will be."
"And all who dwell on the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb who was slain."
Its meaning is the same as Rev.17:8 below:
"And those who dwell on the earth whose names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world will marvel when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet will be."
I may be mistaken, but it seems one of you is speaking of v.6 (PERFECT participle - 'HAVING BEEN slain')... the other of you is speaking of v.9 (AORIST indicative - 'You WERE slain').
Perhaps y'all could get on the same page.
Perhaps y'all could get on the same page.
In EITHER case it is an Aorist verb that shows no tense.
Sorry, I got on a different verse the first time.
6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
This is after the fact: He had already been slain and then rose from the dead - so of course the "slain" was past tense. It was 3 days and three nights past tense. The rest of your post is just human reasoning gone wrong.
6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
This is after the fact: He had already been slain and then rose from the dead - so of course the "slain" was past tense. It was 3 days and three nights past tense. The rest of your post is just human reasoning gone wrong.
Your posts are hard to read mixing of scripture that doesn't fit scripture, but you imagine they do. You have proven over and over you don't understand John's chronology.
Rev. 20 is AFTER all resurrections for the just. It is the beginning of the milennial reign. Since God promised the disciples that they would judge, we would expect some of the thrones and judgment would be theirs. Then God promised that some would be over one city and another over ten cities. Sorry, but it makes FAR more sense that the judges will be resurrected people.
God promised the church that we would reign WITH Him. It makes good sense that that the church is there as well as the OT saints. People in old bodies are simply no where near as qualified to judge as those who have been resurrected. Paul said,
1 Cor. 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
It makes good sense that it is the saints (both OT and NT saints) judging. On the other hand, perhaps you picture the church, the body of Christ, each with harps, floating on clouds?
"Possessing the Kingdom" does not in any way mean judging. Perhaps there will be more Jews and Hebrews alive after the 70th week that any other group of people. All people left will be in natural bodies that can repopulate the earth. Without a doubt Daniel is speaking of HIS people, the Jews. I have no problem with that. But Rev. 20 is a different book.
Can you point to a verse anywhere that would show a resurrection when Christ returns? I think the resurrection of the OT saints, plus the Two Witnesses, plus the beheaded all happen at the 7th vial that ENDS the week. Yet, Jesus remains in heaven. The marriage and supper must take place before He returns.
I think I only insert the church where it fits! Perhaps you can point to scriptures that prove me in error.
Col3:1-4 There is no doubt: the church returns with Christ.
Phil3:20a-21 We all know we are citizens of heaven. We each have an address there! We all know Jesus will come from heaven. We all know we will get resurrections bodies.
1Cor6:14 We all know we are going to get resurrection bodies.
These are all good verses but really do not pertain to the question! WE, the CHURCH will reign WITH HIM. We are not going to be floating on clouds! ;-)
Rev. 20 is AFTER all resurrections for the just. It is the beginning of the milennial reign. Since God promised the disciples that they would judge, we would expect some of the thrones and judgment would be theirs. Then God promised that some would be over one city and another over ten cities. Sorry, but it makes FAR more sense that the judges will be resurrected people.
God promised the church that we would reign WITH Him. It makes good sense that that the church is there as well as the OT saints. People in old bodies are simply no where near as qualified to judge as those who have been resurrected. Paul said,
1 Cor. 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
It makes good sense that it is the saints (both OT and NT saints) judging. On the other hand, perhaps you picture the church, the body of Christ, each with harps, floating on clouds?
"Possessing the Kingdom" does not in any way mean judging. Perhaps there will be more Jews and Hebrews alive after the 70th week that any other group of people. All people left will be in natural bodies that can repopulate the earth. Without a doubt Daniel is speaking of HIS people, the Jews. I have no problem with that. But Rev. 20 is a different book.
Can you point to a verse anywhere that would show a resurrection when Christ returns? I think the resurrection of the OT saints, plus the Two Witnesses, plus the beheaded all happen at the 7th vial that ENDS the week. Yet, Jesus remains in heaven. The marriage and supper must take place before He returns.
I think I only insert the church where it fits! Perhaps you can point to scriptures that prove me in error.
Col3:1-4 There is no doubt: the church returns with Christ.
Phil3:20a-21 We all know we are citizens of heaven. We each have an address there! We all know Jesus will come from heaven. We all know we will get resurrections bodies.
1Cor6:14 We all know we are going to get resurrection bodies.
These are all good verses but really do not pertain to the question! WE, the CHURCH will reign WITH HIM. We are not going to be floating on clouds! ;-)
I still had the wrong verse. Anyway, you seem to be saying there is no difference between planning an event and then its fulfillment. Yes, if God planned it, it would be a sure thing, I will agree. But this kind of reasoning has very little bearing on what was written on the outside of the book - supposedly as to who could open the seals. It would have been nice if John saw what was written and told us, but we don't have that information. All we know (well, at least I know) is that a search for one worthy to take the book failed to find anyone so John wrote, "no man was found." You are disagreeing with John.
Of the 10x total that this word is used [G4969 - sphazó (slain)], here's where they are presented...
in the "PERFECT PARTICIPLE" (6x total):
[of others, not Jesus] -
Rev13:3 - "having been slain" - esphagmenēn
Rev6:9 - "having been slain" - esphagmenōn
Rev18:24 - "having been slain" - esphagmenōn
[regarding Jesus] -
Rev5:6 - "having been slain" - esphagmenon
Rev5:12 - "having been slain" - esphagmenon
Rev13:8 - "having been slain" - esphagmenou [NOTE: this verse says "having been SLAIN FROM"... NOT "WRITTEN/HAVE BEEN WRITTEN from/before" as some versions have it]
I think your information is not accurate.
The only verse in Revelation that shows this word in the "AORIST [indicative]" is in 5:9, where the 24 elders are speaking (about Jesus).
in the "PERFECT PARTICIPLE" (6x total):
[of others, not Jesus] -
Rev13:3 - "having been slain" - esphagmenēn
Rev6:9 - "having been slain" - esphagmenōn
Rev18:24 - "having been slain" - esphagmenōn
[regarding Jesus] -
Rev5:6 - "having been slain" - esphagmenon
Rev5:12 - "having been slain" - esphagmenon
Rev13:8 - "having been slain" - esphagmenou [NOTE: this verse says "having been SLAIN FROM"... NOT "WRITTEN/HAVE BEEN WRITTEN from/before" as some versions have it]
I think your information is not accurate.
The only verse in Revelation that shows this word in the "AORIST [indicative]" is in 5:9, where the 24 elders are speaking (about Jesus).
And THAT (5:9) was the verse we were discussing.
Question: does this mean Jesus was the walking dead? Does it mean Jesus was slain before He was born? Or is this verse only telling us that the Godhead had His sacrifice all planned out before earth was created?
Thanks for your work! It seems 13:8 has been translated a lot of different ways. Even the Greek texts don't agree.
Question: does this mean Jesus was the walking dead? Does it mean Jesus was slain before He was born? Or is this verse only telling us that the Godhead had His sacrifice all planned out before earth was created?
Thanks for your work! It seems 13:8 has been translated a lot of different ways. Even the Greek texts don't agree.
I think you're speaking of the "Olive Tree" of Romans 11, right?
Here's what I've posted in the past (on this Subject):
[quoting my past posts on this]
I'm looking for a different quote by George V Wigram... but (in the meantime) in its place, I'll just post this brief portion also by him (note the phrase "God's governmental ways on earth," which is what I believe Roman's 11's "olive tree" represents):
[quoting Wigram]
"Gen. 27:29 [Isaac blessing Jacob]. Let peoples (gamnzim, pl.), serve thee and [manners or sorts of ] nations (l'ummim, pl.) bow down to thee: be lord [a mighty man] over thy brethren.
"Observe, this would not run the source of the division of people back to Shem, Ham and Japhet, so as to make the word to be equivalent to what we call the races of people, in connection with the Noahic earth, who constitute the whole human family. The subdivision here alluded to took place in the family of Isaac, type of the heir of promise, not earlier; and the heads of this subdivision are brought before us in Rom. 9 All God's ways and subdivisions are to be noted."
[also]
"f Israel is the goh'y of experience, promise, blessing on the earth; the center of all God's governmental ways on earth; but in saying that, I look at them from outside and as one whole. When they are owned as gammi, my people, their detailed state and associations within is the aspect in which they are considered."
--George V Wigram
http://bibletruthpublishers.com/heb...t-testimony-psalms-article/g-v-wigram/la61041
____________
[quoting that other article by Wigram]
"[re: Romans 11] In Jesus Christ, if the question be about Christian position, eternal life, or the Church considered in her essential relationship to Christ, there was neither Jew nor Gentile; the thoughts found in this chapter [Romans 11] can THERE have no place. If the question be about the cutting off of an individual for sinful conduct, little matters it whether he be Jew or Gentile; that has nothing to do with it, and on the other hand, there would be no question about grafting in again of the Jews more than of any others, and neither Jews nor others could be grafted in, if God had cut them off in such a manner. And if it were a question about a warning from the Apostle to Christians at Rome, and so to others elsewhere, as being brethren, it would be almost nonsense to say, " And thou, O Gentile, take heed!" Why, thou, O Gentile? Had not Christians, Jews by birth, as much need to take heed? Or could the Spirit of God, in such a warning, have made the distinction, and thus denied the principle of, the Church of God in which there is neither Jew nor Gentile? If the question is about a divine administration upon earth, then God can well make the distinction and develop his ways towards the one and the other; and it is plain that from the commencement of the ninth chapter the Apostle is occupied with and pointedly contrasts the Jews and the Gentiles, presenting us with the administration of the divine ways upon the earth. First declaring his attachment to Israel, he points out an election in the election for the earth, and further, that if God according to his sovereignty had chosen Israel (and such was Israel's boast), He had not renounced His sovereignty; and consequently, He could call the Gentiles if he would. Then he recalls to mind that the prophets had shown that a little remnant only, of Israel, at such an epoch, would be saved, and that a stone of stumbling would be laid in Zion."
-- Thoughts on Romans 11 and the Responsibility of the Church, Present Testimony: Volume 4 George V. Wigram
http://bibletruthpublishers.com/tho...the-church/present-testimony-volume-4/la85282
[end quoting; bold and underline mine]
[end quoting old posts]
____________
[bearing in mind that the section Romans 9-11 is basically covering the Subject of "nations" ("Israel [singular nation]" and "the Gentiles [plural nations]"--see how many times "Israel / Israelites," "Gentiles" [and their corresponding pronouns] are contrasted throughout this section)]
____________
Your question has to do with "after the resurrection"... [of who? "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY"? the OT saints? the Trib saints? Who do you mean? Just asking...]
In "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY," there is NO DISTINCTION (in our standing before God "IN CHRIST"... though made up of both Jews and Gentiles);
those who come to faith FOLLOWING "our Rapture / THE Departure," Scripture shows those "Jews/Israel [singular nation]" and "the Gentiles [/nations plural]" as being distinct.
"The 12" were told they will "sit on 12 thrones, judgING the 12 tribes of Israel" (in the MK age; per Lk22:30 / Matt19:28)... so it is apparent that the "12 tribes of Israel" will be in existence then (and that is not the specific task *we / the Church which is His body* have been assigned, for example).
[Eph1:10 ('[That] in the dispensation of the fulness of times') is not speaking of "this present age [singular]"/the "NOW" as the rest of the epistle is, for another example... though many suggest that it is]
Hope this helps you see my perspective, somewhat... = )
Here's what I've posted in the past (on this Subject):
[quoting my past posts on this]
I'm looking for a different quote by George V Wigram... but (in the meantime) in its place, I'll just post this brief portion also by him (note the phrase "God's governmental ways on earth," which is what I believe Roman's 11's "olive tree" represents):
[quoting Wigram]
"Gen. 27:29 [Isaac blessing Jacob]. Let peoples (gamnzim, pl.), serve thee and [manners or sorts of ] nations (l'ummim, pl.) bow down to thee: be lord [a mighty man] over thy brethren.
"Observe, this would not run the source of the division of people back to Shem, Ham and Japhet, so as to make the word to be equivalent to what we call the races of people, in connection with the Noahic earth, who constitute the whole human family. The subdivision here alluded to took place in the family of Isaac, type of the heir of promise, not earlier; and the heads of this subdivision are brought before us in Rom. 9 All God's ways and subdivisions are to be noted."
[also]
"f Israel is the goh'y of experience, promise, blessing on the earth; the center of all God's governmental ways on earth; but in saying that, I look at them from outside and as one whole. When they are owned as gammi, my people, their detailed state and associations within is the aspect in which they are considered."
--George V Wigram
http://bibletruthpublishers.com/heb...t-testimony-psalms-article/g-v-wigram/la61041
____________
[quoting that other article by Wigram]
"[re: Romans 11] In Jesus Christ, if the question be about Christian position, eternal life, or the Church considered in her essential relationship to Christ, there was neither Jew nor Gentile; the thoughts found in this chapter [Romans 11] can THERE have no place. If the question be about the cutting off of an individual for sinful conduct, little matters it whether he be Jew or Gentile; that has nothing to do with it, and on the other hand, there would be no question about grafting in again of the Jews more than of any others, and neither Jews nor others could be grafted in, if God had cut them off in such a manner. And if it were a question about a warning from the Apostle to Christians at Rome, and so to others elsewhere, as being brethren, it would be almost nonsense to say, " And thou, O Gentile, take heed!" Why, thou, O Gentile? Had not Christians, Jews by birth, as much need to take heed? Or could the Spirit of God, in such a warning, have made the distinction, and thus denied the principle of, the Church of God in which there is neither Jew nor Gentile? If the question is about a divine administration upon earth, then God can well make the distinction and develop his ways towards the one and the other; and it is plain that from the commencement of the ninth chapter the Apostle is occupied with and pointedly contrasts the Jews and the Gentiles, presenting us with the administration of the divine ways upon the earth. First declaring his attachment to Israel, he points out an election in the election for the earth, and further, that if God according to his sovereignty had chosen Israel (and such was Israel's boast), He had not renounced His sovereignty; and consequently, He could call the Gentiles if he would. Then he recalls to mind that the prophets had shown that a little remnant only, of Israel, at such an epoch, would be saved, and that a stone of stumbling would be laid in Zion."
-- Thoughts on Romans 11 and the Responsibility of the Church, Present Testimony: Volume 4 George V. Wigram
http://bibletruthpublishers.com/tho...the-church/present-testimony-volume-4/la85282
[end quoting; bold and underline mine]
[end quoting old posts]
____________
[bearing in mind that the section Romans 9-11 is basically covering the Subject of "nations" ("Israel [singular nation]" and "the Gentiles [plural nations]"--see how many times "Israel / Israelites," "Gentiles" [and their corresponding pronouns] are contrasted throughout this section)]
____________
Your question has to do with "after the resurrection"... [of who? "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY"? the OT saints? the Trib saints? Who do you mean? Just asking...]
In "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY," there is NO DISTINCTION (in our standing before God "IN CHRIST"... though made up of both Jews and Gentiles);
those who come to faith FOLLOWING "our Rapture / THE Departure," Scripture shows those "Jews/Israel [singular nation]" and "the Gentiles [/nations plural]" as being distinct.
"The 12" were told they will "sit on 12 thrones, judgING the 12 tribes of Israel" (in the MK age; per Lk22:30 / Matt19:28)... so it is apparent that the "12 tribes of Israel" will be in existence then (and that is not the specific task *we / the Church which is His body* have been assigned, for example).
[Eph1:10 ('[That] in the dispensation of the fulness of times') is not speaking of "this present age [singular]"/the "NOW" as the rest of the epistle is, for another example... though many suggest that it is]
Hope this helps you see my perspective, somewhat... = )
We were talking about Rev. 20, which will be after all the resurrections of the righteous. Will there be any real distinction between NT saints and OT saints then? We will all have resurrection bodies then. I cannot think of any scriptures that would show the church distinct from OT saints then. Perhaps you can.
Yes, I think the Disciples of Jesus will be judges of Israel. But there is a lot more world out there than Israel! Perhaps I will be a judge in Timbuktu? Only God knows.
I agree with you on Paul's "fullness of times. It is at the end of all ages - probably at the end of the 1000 year reign.
Yes, I think the Disciples of Jesus will be judges of Israel. But there is a lot more world out there than Israel! Perhaps I will be a judge in Timbuktu? Only God knows.
I agree with you on Paul's "fullness of times. It is at the end of all ages - probably at the end of the 1000 year reign.
As I see it, ewq1938 is endeavoring to have you view the letter as a whole, noting all the places where the "PERFECT PARTICPLE" (for "SLAIN") is used RE: JESUS, so as to better fully grasp how the letter-writer (John) meant for the readers to understand it...
That's how those teaching hermeneutics encourage Bible students to study (method of) interpretation: by viewing *first* how the writer used a phrase within his own letter/writings, before venturing out to wider texts, for any given word or phrase. So in this Book (Rev) 3x it uses "having been slain [PERFECT PARTICIPLE]" regarding Jesus. Given that the letter was written / sent / delivered in one piece (delivered at one time, rather than sent piecemeal, scattered over time), it's reasonable to view the letter in its entirety rather than trying to interpret one small section of it apart from its whole, if that makes sense. That's what I think "ewq" is encouraging you to think about (IMO).
[the "picture" I was going to try to draw (which wasn't [and isn't] nearly the way I hoped/hope to convey it--and AGAIN, Oseas' Post #265 is WAY BETTER!) was something like... a long line of people (in the categories of: "in heaven, [and] in earth, [and] under the earth") each in turn had to say, "no, I am not worthy to open the book/scroll... It 'isn't I'... not me!" (no one "was found" worthy)... and then last of all, at the end of the long line of the entirety of humanity, Jesus is standing "as having been slain [but alive again!]" and HE IS THE ONE (the ONLY ONE!) "WORTHY TO OPEN" the book/scroll!! Everyone cheers and says, "HE IS WORTHY!!" / "THOU ART WORTHY!!"]
That's how those teaching hermeneutics encourage Bible students to study (method of) interpretation: by viewing *first* how the writer used a phrase within his own letter/writings, before venturing out to wider texts, for any given word or phrase. So in this Book (Rev) 3x it uses "having been slain [PERFECT PARTICIPLE]" regarding Jesus. Given that the letter was written / sent / delivered in one piece (delivered at one time, rather than sent piecemeal, scattered over time), it's reasonable to view the letter in its entirety rather than trying to interpret one small section of it apart from its whole, if that makes sense.
That's what I think "ewq" is encouraging you to think about (IMO).[the "picture" I was going to try to draw (which wasn't [and isn't] nearly the way I hoped/hope to convey it--and AGAIN, Oseas' Post #265 is WAY BETTER!) was something like... a long line of people (in the categories of: "in heaven, [and] in earth, [and] under the earth") each in turn had to say, "no, I am not worthy to open the book/scroll... It 'isn't I'... not me!" (no one "was found" worthy)... and then last of all, at the end of the long line of the entirety of humanity, Jesus is standing "as having been slain [but alive again!]" and HE IS THE ONE (the ONLY ONE!) "WORTHY TO OPEN" the book/scroll!! Everyone cheers and says, "HE IS WORTHY!!" / "THOU ART WORTHY!!"]
As I see it, ewq1938 is endeavoring to have you view the letter as a whole, noting all the places where the "PERFECT PARTICPLE" (for "SLAIN") is used RE: JESUS, so as to better fully grasp how the letter-writer (John) meant for the readers to understand it...
That's how those teaching hermeneutics encourage Bible students to study (method of) interpretation: by viewing *first* how the writer used a phrase within his own letter/writings, before venturing out to wider texts, for any given word or phrase. So in this Book (Rev) 3x it uses "having been slain [PERFECT PARTICIPLE]" regarding Jesus. Given that the letter was written / sent / delivered in one piece (delivered at one time, rather than sent piecemeal, scattered over time), it's reasonable to view the letter in its entirety rather than trying to interpret one small section of it apart from its whole, if that makes sense. That's what I think "ewq" is encouraging you to think about (IMO).
[the "picture" I was going to try to draw (which wasn't [and isn't] nearly the way I hoped/hope to convey it--and AGAIN, Oseas' Post #265 is WAY BETTER!) was something like... a long line of people (in the categories of: "in heaven, [and] in earth, [and] under the earth") each in turn had to say, "no, I am not worthy to open the book/scroll... It 'isn't I'... not me!" (no one "was found" worthy)... and then last of all, at the end of the long line of the entirety of humanity, Jesus is standing "as having been slain [but alive again!]" and HE IS THE ONE (the ONLY ONE!) "WORTHY TO OPEN" the book/scroll!! Everyone cheers and says, "HE IS WORTHY!!" / "THOU ART WORTHY!!"]
That's how those teaching hermeneutics encourage Bible students to study (method of) interpretation: by viewing *first* how the writer used a phrase within his own letter/writings, before venturing out to wider texts, for any given word or phrase. So in this Book (Rev) 3x it uses "having been slain [PERFECT PARTICIPLE]" regarding Jesus. Given that the letter was written / sent / delivered in one piece (delivered at one time, rather than sent piecemeal, scattered over time), it's reasonable to view the letter in its entirety rather than trying to interpret one small section of it apart from its whole, if that makes sense.
That's what I think "ewq" is encouraging you to think about (IMO).[the "picture" I was going to try to draw (which wasn't [and isn't] nearly the way I hoped/hope to convey it--and AGAIN, Oseas' Post #265 is WAY BETTER!) was something like... a long line of people (in the categories of: "in heaven, [and] in earth, [and] under the earth") each in turn had to say, "no, I am not worthy to open the book/scroll... It 'isn't I'... not me!" (no one "was found" worthy)... and then last of all, at the end of the long line of the entirety of humanity, Jesus is standing "as having been slain [but alive again!]" and HE IS THE ONE (the ONLY ONE!) "WORTHY TO OPEN" the book/scroll!! Everyone cheers and says, "HE IS WORTHY!!" / "THOU ART WORTHY!!"]
Question: suppose the writing on the outside of the book, where all could read it, said only the Redeemer of men could qualify to open the seals. Would Jesus being called the Redeemer in the OT suffice? Or would He really have to BECOME the redeemer by dying, then raising from the dead?
And they sang a new song: You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slaughtered, and you purchased people for God by your blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.
I just have to take John at his word. I wish everyone would.
By the way, Oseas was not following the script at all. His theory was just imagination.
-
1
- Show all
5:9 says "hast redeemed US" [23 of 24 total mss available for v.9 all have it as "US"... the other mss LEAVES THAT WORD BLANK/UNTRANSLATED (the word "people" is not found in that text)]
[compare also with 1:5-6 -- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/1/5/ss1/s_1168005 ; 5:9 https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/5/9/ss1/s_1172009 ]
[compare also with 1:5-6
-- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/1/5/ss1/s_1168005 ; 5:9 https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/5/9/ss1/s_1172009 ]
Last edited:
-
1
- Show all
5:9 says "hast redeemed US" [23 of 24 total mss available for v.9 all have it as "US"... the other mss LEAVES THAT WORD BLANK/UNTRANSLATED (the word "people" is not found in that text)]
[compare also with 1:5-6 -- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/1/5/ss1/s_1168005 ; 5:9 https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/5/9/ss1/s_1172009 ]
[compare also with 1:5-6
-- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/1/5/ss1/s_1168005 ; 5:9 https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/5/9/ss1/s_1172009 ]
WHY was Jesus found worthy? And WHY was He NOT found in the first search?
We know Jesus died for all: 2 Cor 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them...
What was God's purpose in chapters 4 & 5?
Why show a throne room with Jesus MISSING - when we would expect Him to be at the right hand of the Father?
Why show the Holy Spirit there - when we would expect Him to have been send down some 60 years previous?
Why show a search for one worthy that ended in failure?
Then show that later Jesus was found after He "prevailed? What did He "prevail" over?
Finally, why show Jesus ascended and the Holy Spirit sent down in a vision mostly about FUTURE events?
Have you ever been asked these questions? Have you ever asked yourself these questions?
Brilliant! Just Brilliant! But I wonder why you don't follow your own advice? ;-)
John used the color white 17 times in Revelation. Let's look at them:
Revelation 1:14 [righteousness / Godliness]
His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
Revelation 2:17 [righteousness / Godliness]
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
Revelation 3:4 [worthiness]
Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
Revelation 3:5 [righteousness]
He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Revelation 3:18 [righteousness]
I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Revelation 4:4 [righteousness]
And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.
Revelation 6:2 [?????????????]
And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.
Revelation 6:11 [righteousness]
And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Revelation 7:9 [righteousness]
After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Revelation 7:13 [righteousness]
And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
Revelation 7:14 [righteousness]
And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Revelation 14:14 [God's Glory?]
And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
Revelation 15:6 [righteousness / Godliness]
And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.
Revelation 19:8 [righteousness]
And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
Revelation 19:11 [righteousness / Godliness]
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Revelation 19:14 righteousness]
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Revelation 20:11 [righteousness / Godliness]
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Yet somehow you brush all this aside and IMAGINE that God would then use white ONE TIME for something evil? This book is a revelation, not a hiding! I am telling you as a Christian brother to another brother, God would never do what you are suggesting. That means your whole belief system on Revelation is off.
John used the color white 17 times in Revelation. Let's look at them:
Revelation 1:14 [righteousness / Godliness]
His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
Revelation 2:17 [righteousness / Godliness]
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
Revelation 3:4 [worthiness]
Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
Revelation 3:5 [righteousness]
He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Revelation 3:18 [righteousness]
I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Revelation 4:4 [righteousness]
And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.
Revelation 6:2 [?????????????]
And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.
Revelation 6:11 [righteousness]
And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Revelation 7:9 [righteousness]
After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Revelation 7:13 [righteousness]
And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
Revelation 7:14 [righteousness]
And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Revelation 14:14 [God's Glory?]
And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
Revelation 15:6 [righteousness / Godliness]
And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.
Revelation 19:8 [righteousness]
And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
Revelation 19:11 [righteousness / Godliness]
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Revelation 19:14 righteousness]
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Revelation 20:11 [righteousness / Godliness]
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Yet somehow you brush all this aside and IMAGINE that God would then use white ONE TIME for something evil? This book is a revelation, not a hiding! I am telling you as a Christian brother to another brother, God would never do what you are suggesting. That means your whole belief system on Revelation is off.
And yet, you do not see the ppl (in the "things WHICH ARE" section [chpts 2-3]) as being the same as the ppl shown here in "things which must come to pass in quickness [noun]" / FUTURE section [4:1 onward]... who are saying "has redeemed US" [similarly to the wording in 1:5-6 "US... US"]... and in fact you view "considering who these [24 elders] are" as a DISTRACTION (from your *interpretation*), even though not only is the same word "white [G3022]" used, but also the same words "clothed [G4016]" [now 'having been clothed [perfect participle - G4016]'] and "raiment/garments [G2440]" Entirely the same phrasing... but we can *dismiss* that thought because it doesn't fit in with your viewpoint.
Your viewpoint neglects to align Paul's acknowledging of the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3]" (that Jesus Himself spoke of) as the STARTING POINT of "the Day of the Lord" (aka the TRIB years at its commencing), etc... In light of that (and other "chronology" and "timing" issues revealed in Scripture), I reject your viewpoint.
Entirely the same phrasing... but we can *dismiss* that thought because it doesn't fit in with your viewpoint. Your viewpoint neglects to align Paul's acknowledging of the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3]" (that Jesus Himself spoke of) as the STARTING POINT of "the Day of the Lord" (aka the TRIB years at its commencing), etc... In light of that (and other "chronology" and "timing" issues revealed in Scripture), I reject your viewpoint.
I know exactly what he was endeavoring. But I have a big problem: Jesus, the head of the church said this to me:
“John watched a search to find one worthy to open the seals—a search that ended in failure—and that is the reason John wept much: no man was found worthy. However, if you read ahead, you find that I was found worthy to break the seals. Why then was I not found in that first search?”
Why would I listen to someone who only thinks they know but disagrees with Jesus, when I have these words from Jesus Himself? Sorry, but in every case I am going with the Master.
Note, Jesus said that first search John watched ended in failure. eqw denies that. I am going with Jesus.
Jesus said He was not found worthy in the first search. eqw says He was found - there was no second search. Sorry, but I am going with Jesus on this.
I think you both may be missing what MUST have been written on the outside of the book as to the qualifications to open it. The truth is, what ever it was, Jesus was not qualifed to open the book at the time of that first search. I think we can find the answer in this verse:
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
CSB
And they sang a new song: You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slaughtered, and you purchased people [US} for God by your blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.
(I added the US for your benefit so you would not get led astray)
eqw seems stuck on WHO JESUS IS, but "prevailed" is not who He is, but rather what HE DID. In other words, Jesus DID something that made Him qualified. What did He do? He allowed Himself to be slaghtered, He then PREVAILED over death, and was then found worthy.
See how simple this is? What else did Jesus prevail over after He died?
Have I erred in some way against scripture?
“John watched a search to find one worthy to open the seals—a search that ended in failure—and that is the reason John wept much: no man was found worthy. However, if you read ahead, you find that I was found worthy to break the seals. Why then was I not found in that first search?”
Why would I listen to someone who only thinks they know but disagrees with Jesus, when I have these words from Jesus Himself? Sorry, but in every case I am going with the Master.
Note, Jesus said that first search John watched ended in failure. eqw denies that. I am going with Jesus.
Jesus said He was not found worthy in the first search. eqw says He was found - there was no second search. Sorry, but I am going with Jesus on this.
I think you both may be missing what MUST have been written on the outside of the book as to the qualifications to open it. The truth is, what ever it was, Jesus was not qualifed to open the book at the time of that first search. I think we can find the answer in this verse:
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
CSB
And they sang a new song: You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slaughtered, and you purchased people [US} for God by your blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.
(I added the US for your benefit so you would not get led astray)
eqw seems stuck on WHO JESUS IS, but "prevailed" is not who He is, but rather what HE DID. In other words, Jesus DID something that made Him qualified. What did He do? He allowed Himself to be slaghtered, He then PREVAILED over death, and was then found worthy.
See how simple this is? What else did Jesus prevail over after He died?
Have I erred in some way against scripture?
And yet, you do not see the ppl (in the "things WHICH ARE" section [chpts 2-3]) as being the same as the ppl shown here in "things which must come to pass in quickness [noun]" / FUTURE section [4:1 onward]... who are saying "has redeemed US" [similarly to the wording in 1:5-6 "US... US"]... and in fact you view "considering who these [24 elders] are" as a DISTRACTION (from your *interpretation*), even though not only is the same word "white [G3022]" used, but also the same words "clothed [G4016]" [now 'having been clothed [perfect participle - G4016]'] and "raiment/garments [G2440]" Entirely the same phrasing... but we can *dismiss* that thought because it doesn't fit in with your viewpoint.
Your viewpoint neglects to align Paul's acknowledging of the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3]" (that Jesus Himself spoke of) as the STARTING POINT of "the Day of the Lord" (aka the TRIB years at its commencing), etc... In light of that (and other "chronology" and "timing" issues revealed in Scripture), I reject your viewpoint.
Entirely the same phrasing... but we can *dismiss* that thought because it doesn't fit in with your viewpoint. Your viewpoint neglects to align Paul's acknowledging of the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3]" (that Jesus Himself spoke of) as the STARTING POINT of "the Day of the Lord" (aka the TRIB years at its commencing), etc... In light of that (and other "chronology" and "timing" issues revealed in Scripture), I reject your viewpoint.