The Book of Revelation: Mystery Or Profitable?

[Right Divider]

So why all of a sudden is 144,000 and all those 12's literal?

"all of a sudden"?

There is NO reason not to take them literally. Unless you have a preconceived motive to believe that they are otherwise.

Note that the 12 groups of 12,000 are named tribes of Israel.

 

[Right Divider]

Who is the root?

It does not matter, since it's clearly not Israel.

 

[glorydaz]

That all depends on how you define the Great Tribulation. I have not seen the Bible call any particular time period the Great Tribulation. What it does say, is that the church (all believers) will suffer tribulations, and indeed they have, are, and will to come.

You keep ignoring it when it's posted. Matt. 24: 21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

And lest you say this is talking about 70AD you have this. There are two questions, and you keep ignoring the last part.

Matt. 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

 

[glorydaz]

The interlude tells us of this sealing in a vision. In this vision we see:
Four angels
At the four corners of the earth
Holding four winds
The seal confirms God's ownership

I do not think there is any question that these things are figurative or symbols. The earth doesn't have corners, angels can't hold wind, God doesn't come down and stamp with a stamp.

A common expression -- four corners. Clear and undeniable.

Isaiah 11:12
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Angels can do whatever God has them do. Mountains can move, seas can part and be turned into blood.

There is no legitimate reason to think the naming of the tribes while naming the 144,000 is anything other than Jews.

The very fact that Israel is where it is today, surrounded by enemies, is proof that they are present in the last days.
Seriously - a coincidence?

 

[Arial]

You keep ignoring it when it's posted. Matt. 24: 21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

And lest you say this is talking about 70AD you have this. There are two questions, and you keep ignoring the last part.

Matt. 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

I didn't ignore it when you brought it up in a different thread, making a different point. Let's take them in order.
3. Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sing of Your coming, and the end of the age?"" Two questions are being asked. 1When will these things be? What things? Matt 24:1-2. The destruction of the temple. 2. What will be the sign of Your coming and the end of the age? (His coming is the end of the age.) Jesus answers by telling them what will happen before His second coming (4-14). Anyone can see that all these things are happening now, have been happening before now, will continue to happen tomorrow. They will now doubt become worse leading up to just before His second coming, be have no way to measure today(any day) by what might happen in the future. In verses 15-22 He seems to be talking about something very specific that the disciples would experience because they did (A,D. 70), but may occur also just before His second coming in some other way, though I do not recall it being mentioned in any of the judgment cycles in Rev.

In verse 21 it says there will be great tribulation just before the end but it does not call it The Great Tribulation and is not specified as to number of years, in other words, a specific time period.

 

[Arial]

It does not matter, since it's clearly not Israel.

It is in the Bible. I am sure it matters. But never mind. Why do you say it is clearly not Israel?

 

[Arial]

"all of a sudden"?

There is NO reason not to take them literally. Unless you have a preconceived motive to believe that they are otherwise.

Note that the 12 groups of 12,000 are named tribes of Israel.

By all of a sudden, I obviously mean why is everything else in the vision portrayed in symbolic form but not the 144,000.
Yes, they are the tribes of Israel---minus Dan. For God's symbolic use of the number twelve, see the post you are quoting from. It is not accidental that there are 12 tribes and 12 apostles and hundreds of other uses of that specific number and multiples of it. God chose that number.

 

[Arial]

A common expression -- four corners. Clear and undeniable.

Isaiah 11:12
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Angels can do whatever God has them do. Mountains can move, seas can part and be turned into blood.

There is no legitimate reason to think the naming of the tribes while naming the 144,000 is anything other than Jews.

The very fact that Israel is where it is today, surrounded by enemies, is proof that they are present in the last days.
Seriously - a coincidence?

The number four itself represents creation and that is what it is saying here. And there is a legitimate and scripturally sound way of seeing the 144,000 in the way that I showed. If you say there isn't, then you need to refute what I have said with something other than simply saying it is not legitimate.

The fact that Israel is here today and surrounded by enemies is not proof of anything other than they are here and surrounded by enemies. I am not disputing that they will be here in the last days---we are actually in the last days and have been since the resurrection----just saying that your statement is assuming that the last days is what you call the Great Tribulation of seven years, or three and a half years, however one divides it, and as such Israel's current situation is not proof of what you said. It would presume that you know when those last days according to you are, and that we are in them.

 

[glorydaz]

I didn't ignore it when you brought it up in a different thread, making a different point. Let's take them in order.
3. Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sing of Your coming, and the end of the age?"" Two questions are being asked. 1When will these things be? What things? Matt 24:1-2. The destruction of the temple. 2. What will be the sign of Your coming and the end of the age? (His coming is the end of the age.) Jesus answers by telling them what will happen before His second coming (4-14). Anyone can see that all these things are happening now, have been happening before now, will continue to happen tomorrow. They will now doubt become worse leading up to just before His second coming, be have no way to measure today(any day) by what might happen in the future. In verses 15-22 He seems to be talking about something very specific that the disciples would experience because they did (A,D. 70), but may occur also just before His second coming in some other way, though I do not recall it being mentioned in any of the judgment cycles in Rev.

In verse 21 it says there will be great tribulation just before the end but it does not call it The Great Tribulation and is not specified as to number of years, in other words, a specific time period.

Two questions, as I said, and Jesus answers both of them. You can assume He meant something other than what He said, but He was very clear. I'm quite confident that Jesus knew exactly what He was talking about when he said this. Why are you not believing Him? Because it's not in capital letters?

Matthew 24:21
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

 

[Arial]

Two questions, as I said, and Jesus answers both of them. You can assume He meant something other than what He said, but He was very clear. I'm quite confident that Jesus knew exactly what He was talking about when he said this. Why are you not believing Him? Because it's not in capital letters?

He did know exactly what He was talking about. And I do believe Him. The question is, do you know what He was talking about? Or are you telling me what He was talking about because you think you know what He was talking about? And are you making what He said fit what you want to or do already believe? He is talking about two different things----the destruction of the temple, and what will happen before His second coming. You seem to be lumping it all together and then jumping to the conclusion it is all in the period you call the Great Tribulation.

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Are you skimming again? I said it would get worse before the end. So we don't keep talking past each other, define for me what you are calling the Great Tribulation.

 

[glorydaz]

The number four itself represents creation and that is what it is saying here. And there is a legitimate and scripturally sound way of seeing the 144,000 in the way that I showed. If you say there isn't, then you need to refute what I have said with something other than simply saying it is not legitimate.

Your pulling up the number four to represent creation is very odd considering the verse is so explicit about who the 144,000 are.

The fact that Israel is here today and surrounded by enemies is not proof of anything other than they are here and surrounded by enemies. I am not disputing that they will be here in the last days---we are actually in the last days and have been since the resurrection----just saying that your statement is assuming that the last days is what you call the Great Tribulation of seven years, or three and a half years, however one divides it, and as such Israel's current situation is not proof of what you said. It would presume that you know when those last days according to you are, and that we are in them.

So, it sounds to me like you should be doing a study on Daniel 7-9. It's all been prophesied concerning the time line, and where those figures come from. Right now, I'm talking about what Jesus said, very explicitly, concerning the great tribulation that would come upon the earth. It really is bigger than anything that has ever been.

It's not what i call the great tribulation. It's what Jesus called it. Israel is integral to the end time scenario. The Fathers of faith often said that if they didn't know better, they'd say Israel would one day return to their homeland. And finally, after all that time, they have. Now the prophecies are making sense. Ever read about the dry bones?

 

[glorydaz]

He did know exactly what He was talking about. And I do believe Him. The question is, do you know what He was talking about? Or are you telling me what He was talking about because you think you know what He was talking about? And are you making what He said fit what you want to or do already believe? He is talking about two different things----the destruction of the temple, and what will happen before His second coming. You seem to be lumping it all together and then jumping to the conclusion it is all in the period you call the Great Tribulation.

No, I pointed out from the very start that there were two questions, and two answers. And why you should look at Daniel.

Mark 16:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Mark 16:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.

Mark 16:24-26
But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

Are you skimming again? I said it would get worse before the end. So we don't keep talking past each other, define for me what you are calling the Great Tribulation.

It will be the time after the Rapture of the Church.
It's all pretty much God's wrath on the unbelieving world. The last chance for them to turn to God or receive the mark of the Beast.
It's all right there in Revelation.

 

[glorydaz]

It is in the Bible. I am sure it matters. But never mind. Why do you say it is clearly not Israel?

The way it was written it couldn't be Israel. I'll hazard a guess, though, from my previous studies.

• Revelation 5:5
  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.
  
  
  
• Revelation 22:16
  I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

 

[Right Divider]

By all of a sudden, I obviously mean why is everything else in the vision portrayed in symbolic form but not the 144,000.

Symbols always point to realities.

Just because there are lots of symbols does NOT mean that everything has to be symbolic.

Yes, they are the tribes of Israel---minus Dan.

Plus one other... Dan committed actions that got them "kicked off the list".

For God's symbolic use of the number twelve, see the post you are quoting from. It is not accidental that there are 12 tribes and 12 apostles and hundreds of other uses of that specific number and multiples of it. God chose that number.

God chose that number for the nation of Israel.

 

[Clete]

The amillennialist arrives at this view of no distinction between Israel and the church in salvation or in Revelation from scripture. The "servants of our God" (Rev 7:3) must include Gentile believers as well, because of this: Eph 2:11-22, (I am not going to quote all these scriptures mentioned as it makes a post enormously long, which then makes a response that is line by line, even more enormous etc., and tends to get too many ideas to try and focus on in response. This site needs a the thingy connected to the scriptures that opens them up for the reader.) The promises only associated with the 144,000 in Rev 9:4; 14:1-5 confirm it.

I couldn't make any sense of this at all!

Revelation 7:3 “Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.”

Then the very next sentence....

Revelation 7:4 Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel.

You say, in spite of John, one of the Apostles to Israel, telling us explicitly that the 144,000 were all Jews, that Gentiles were included because of something Paul, the (singular) Apostle to the Gentiles said in Ephesians chapter two.

Okay, so which tribe did the Gentiles from Ephesus get plugged into, Arial? Which tribe are you in and how could you possibly know?

God turned away from rebellious Israel, but not Israel as His people.

That's your doctrine but it hasn't anything to do with what we are taught in scripture.

Israel, as a nation, was cut off. Those who had already believed weren't cut off but God ended the special relationship that the nation of Israel had with Him. The original plan was to give Israel a kingdom through which salvation through Christ would be preached to all nations but Israel did evil in God's sight and so He repented of the good that He had thought to do to Israel and He did not do it. Instead, He turned to the Gentiles.

That is, in a nutshell what Romans 9 is all about. Paul explains there that the principle God communicated in Jeremiah 18:7-10 had been applied to Israel. Now, as I said, those who had believed were not cut off but instead continued on just as they were called (Romans 11:29).

Romans 11:15-24 tells us that believing Gentiles are grafted into Israel, we become branches of one tree---the people of God, in Christ, the same as we see in the parable of the vine and the branches. And this speaks of spiritual Israel, it is not saying that Gentiles become Jews.

The passage you cite does not support your thesis here. If Israel was still in the picture but with the Gentiles added then how is that going to make Israel jealous? How would Paul be able to arose some of his countrymen to envy if they're still part of the picture and we gentiles have just been added to it?

No! The root isn't Israel! Israel was a branch that had been removed and we Gentiles are a different branch that was grafted in its place. We were not grafted into a branch that was cut off, were replaced a branch that was cut off. We are not an addition to Israel, we are its replacement. And that's according to the passage you cited!

One day, Israel's branch will be grafted right back into that tree again, the process of which is what Revelation is all about, by the way.

Clete

 

[Clete]

There actually is another way to see it, and for me personally it makes much more sense out of the entire book. But here is the other way:

At the end of chapter six we see the sixth seal leading up to the second coming opened. We would perhaps expect to see the seventh seal opened either in that chapter or at the beginning of the next chapter. Instead what we see in Rev 7: 1-8 is an interlude, and there are several in the series of judgement. In these interludes, God comforts and strengthens the saints, assuring them that He will protect them even in the calamities shown in chapter 6. All who are sealed as His will be protected from spiritual harm, even if they suffer persecution and in some cases death. The interlude tells us of this sealing in a vision. In this vision we see:
Four angels
At the four corners of the earth
Holding four winds
The seal confirms God's ownership

I do not think there is any question that these things are figurative or symbols. The earth doesn't have corners, angels can't hold wind, God doesn't come down and stamp with a stamp.

So why all of a sudden is 144,000 and all those 12's literal? The answer, according to amillennialism is in finding the Biblical meaning and use by God, of the number 12 and well as a 1000. In other words, is there a reason why God is using these numbers when He uses them elsewhere in the Bible? Is their a reason there are 12 tribes and twelve apostles, and 12's used in the New Jerusalem, the new heaven and the news earth, 12 baskets of fragments, the 12's in the house of the Lord (Solomon's temple), the 12's used in the sacrifices, etc. etc.? The simple answer is that yes God has a reason and the reason is because it represents something. There is not one thing that God does that is not connected and carries through the entire Bible with consistency.

So what does it represent? It is a perfect number and represents God's power and authority as well as a perfect governmental foundation. Therefore the 144,000 12x12x1000 (1000 used in scripture to express a long period of time or a great number) represents all the people of God, which is His power and authority and the perfect governmental foundation.

In Rev 9 we see it expressed as a great multitude from every nation and tribe and people and nation (9-17). As for 9:3-7 was there a literal seal on their foreheads? That was covered at the beginning of this post.

Well this is entirely unfalsifiable. I'm sorry, Arial, but if you actually think that this is a proper way of formulating doctrine then what in the world is the point of even discussing it with people? Why bother trying to make any of it make sense? Just believe whatever the heck you want and twist the heck out of any passage that doesn't fit until it breaks if need be. I mean, you don't even need a bible at all if this is the sort of thing that you think is a proper way of reading things. The bible was not written in code and the vast majority of it isn't even hard to understand.

I don't get it though. If Israel is still the main gig and we Gentiles are just effectively hangers on then why jump through all these hoops explaining away what these passage plainly state. Why not take all these obvious references to Israel to actually be references to Israel? Where's the need to add the Gentiles to it?

Why wouldn't it be better to conform your doctrine to the bible rather than conforming the bible to your doctrine in this manner? Don't you think that a systematic theology that allows you to simply read the scripture and take it to mean what it seems to be saying would be superior to one that requires this Cirque du Soleil level hoop jumping?

Clete

P.S.
By the way, where you aware that E.W. Bullinger, the guy you practically quoted when you said "It is a perfect number and represents God's power and authority as well as a perfect governmental foundation.", was a dispensationalist?

" Twelve is a perfect number, signifying perfection of government, or of governmental perfection." E.W. Bullinger - bible scholar and dispensationalists extraordinaire.​

Not that it matters at all. I just thought it was curious that you'd use him as a source.

 

[Idolater]

...P.S.
By the way, where you aware that E.W. Bullinger, the guy you practically quoted when you said "It is a perfect number and represents God's power and authority as well as a perfect governmental foundation.", was a dispensationalist?

" Twelve is a perfect number, signifying perfection of government, or of governmental perfection." E.W. Bullinger - bible scholar and dispensationalists extraordinaire.​

Not that it matters at all. I just thought it was curious that you'd use him as a source.

It would certainly explain the rigorous resistance to 666 just being Nero. That closes the interpretation on Revelation, makes it a largely 'preterist' book like how Acts is largely preterist and how the Gospels are largely preterist. There's so much more room for the imagination to run if 666 isn't just Nero.

 

[glorydaz]

It would certainly explain the rigorous resistance to 666 just being Nero. That closes the interpretation on Revelation, makes it a largely 'preterist' book like how Acts is largely preterist and how the Gospels are largely preterist. There's so much more room for the imagination to run if 666 isn't just Nero.

I'm still wondering what you mean by 666 being Nero, or not just Nero. Could you explain that again for me?

 

[Idolater]

I'm still wondering what you mean by 666 being Nero, or not just Nero. Could you explain that again for me?

The idea that it's "just" Nero contends with the idea that Nero is just 'a' 666, but not the only one for all time.

This view believes that there is at least one more '666' to come.

So what I'm saying is that, it's not impossible that Nero is 'the', 'Mr. 666', and that that's the end of it. That's what I mean by the phrase '666 is just Nero'.

 

[Arial]

Well this is entirely unfalsifiable. I'm sorry, Arial, but if you actually think that this is a proper way of formulating doctrine then what in the world is the point of even discussing it with people? Why bother trying to make any of it make sense? Just believe whatever the heck you want and twist the heck out of any passage that doesn't fit until it breaks if need be. I mean, you don't even need a bible at all if this is the sort of thing that you think is a proper way of reading things. The bible was not written in code and the vast majority of it isn't even hard to understand.

I don't get it though. If Israel is still the main gig and we Gentiles are just effectively hangers on then why jump through all these hoops explaining away what these passage plainly state. Why not take all these obvious references to Israel to actually be references to Israel? Where's the need to add the Gentiles to it?

Why wouldn't it be better to conform your doctrine to the bible rather than conforming the bible to your doctrine in this manner? Don't you think that a systematic theology that allows you to simply read the scripture and take it to mean what it seems to be saying would be superior to one that requires this Cirque du Soleil level hoop jumping?

This is a textbook example of a complete lack of critical thinking and a presupposition that all one needs to do is say something and that makes it so. All I find here is personal insult, statements made that express nothing but a hatred of all beliefs but your own with nothing to back up these statements, and a great deal of hot air. A classic display of someone who has nothing but their own opinion and an ego that could keep dozens of of hot air balloons aloft, to fuel them, so they argue from a point of deflection and personal attack, and attempted intimidation.That is to be expected I guess. It is a forum after all.

By the way, where you aware that E.W. Bullinger, the guy you practically quoted when you said "It is a perfect number and represents God's power and authority as well as a perfect governmental foundation.", was a dispensationalist?

" Twelve is a perfect number, signifying perfection of government, or of governmental perfection." E.W. Bullinger - bible scholar and dispensationalists extraordinaire.
Not that it matters at all. I just thought it was curious that you'd use him as a source.

I don't even know who that is, but good job once again changing the topic. You are impossible to carry on a discussion with and lest you pull me into the pit in which you dwell,----audios.