The Book of Revelation: Mystery Or Profitable?

[Clete]

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.

You're delusional.

What did I say that isn't self evident, that your entire post was unfalsifiable? How would anyone falsify it? Anything in the whole book of Revelation can be made into a symbol that means something altogether different than anything that one would get from simply reading the text. How is it even possible to begin debating that? You tacitly admit that you reject the plain meaning and go with symbolic/allegorical interpretations BECAUSE of your doctrine. So, if you can start with your doctrine and make the bible fit, why can't I do the same thing? Why couldn't David Koresh or Jim Jones do it (they both did so, by the way)? Why can't the Catholics do it?

The answer is that they can! There isn't any fundamental reason that you can come up with as to why anyone else, who believes something entirely different that you do, can't find some means to explain away the plain meaning of the text and "interpret" it to mean something that is compatible with the doctrine they brought to the text, that doesn't also defeat your ability to do it.

The reason that is so is because doing doctrine the way you're doing it is fundamentally unfalsifiable. There is no premise to attack because there is no consistent line of reasoning. In a previous post you said that "The amillennialist arrives at this view of no distinction between Israel and the church in salvation or in Revelation from scripture.". The problem there is that you do NOT arrive at the view, you START with that view and interpret everything around it. The convolution/conflation of the Body of Christ with Israel is a foundational presupposition, not an arrived at conclusion that is based on a rational progression from premise to premise to final conclusion.

If you think that claim to be false then show me! Show me the syllogism that has as its conclusion "The Body of Christ and Israel are the same thing."

You aren't the first amillennialist that I've debated, Arial, and that isn't the first time I've asked for such an argument. If you present one, you will be the first to do so but you won't because no such argument exists.

All I find here is personal insult,

You are flatly delusional, Arial! I was very much so intentionally NOT insulting in that post! I commented on the manner that you do doctrine but its not as if you came up with it yourself. Every amillennialist does the exact same thing. And then I asked you questions.

Where are the insults?

statements made that express nothing but a hatred of all beliefs but your own with nothing to back up these statements,

You must surely be projecting. There was no hatred in my post. There wasn't even any anger or even frustration. I simply responded to what you said with the only thing I could think to say and asked pertinent questions that were directly related to your own statements.

Maybe you need to find a different hobby. Sheesh!

and a great deal of hot air.

The only hot air here is this post you've written. There isn't any substance here! Nothing but you ranting about imagined insults that don't exist.

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.

You know what, Arial, the fact of the matter is that you are a liar. Of the two of us, it is you who have done NOTHING to support your ridiculous doctrine. You've not made a single cogent argument. The closest you came was to make the claim that the 144,000 somehow includes Gentiles because of something Paul said in a totally different book of the bible. There wasn't anything said that supports such a connection being made and the fact that John specifically lists off the Twelve Tribes of Israel is completely ignored and not dealt with at all. And that is literally the closest you've come to making an actual argument to support a single aspect of the doctrine you supposedly started this thread to discuss. While I, on the other hand, have not only expressed my objections but have explained WHY I object and am entirely willing, able and even eager to further explain any particular point that you might feel needs further expanation or support. But you don't go there! You wouldn't dare give me an specific point that needs further establishment. Oh no! That would present to both you and the world that I am not the jackass you seem to need me to be!

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.

YOU ARE A TOTAL LIAR!!!!

You want me to believe that you just happen to accidentally quote the guy who everyone in the theological world knows set the bar when it comes to the study of the bible's use of numbers?! And on what planet is it changing the subject away from the biblical use of numbers when someone brings up the guy who literally wrote the book on the subject? I mean, seriously!

Give me a break! The truth is that you didn't think I was familiar enough with Bullinger's work to notice your slight rewording of his writing.

You are truly you own worst enemy, Arial. Everyone now knows that you're an emotionally fragile fool who tells obvious lies and believes whatever the heck she wants regardless of what the bible actually says!

Great job!


P.S.

Arial here is no different than any other knob that desides that the bible doesn't mean what it says. They all, universally, crash and burn. Some in more emotionally spectacular ways than others but at the end of the day its all the same. People who think that God isn't smart enough to write a book that means what it seems to mean are all equally doomed to the same embarrassing fate as Arial. They all come to a place where their contentions are shown to be the indefensible pretensions that they actually are. Why such people ever have the desire to show up on a debate forum, I'll never know.

 

[chrysostom]

Me thinks he protests too much.

 

[Arial]

You're delusional.

What did I say that isn't self evident, that your entire post was unfalsifiable? How would anyone falsify it? Anything in the whole book of Revelation can be made into a symbol that means something altogether different than anything that one would get from simply reading the text. How is it even possible to begin debating that? You tacitly admit that you reject the plain meaning and go with symbolic/allegorical interpretations BECAUSE of your doctrine. So, if you can start with your doctrine and make the bible fit, why can't I do the same thing? Why couldn't David Koresh or Jim Jones do it (they both did so, by the way)? Why can't the Catholics do it?

The answer is that they can! There isn't any fundamental reason that you can come up with as to why anyone else, who believes something entirely different that you do, can't find some means to explain away the plain meaning of the text and "interpret" it to mean something that is compatible with the doctrine they brought to the text, that doesn't also defeat your ability to do it.

The reason that is so is because doing doctrine the way you're doing it is fundamentally unfalsifiable. There is no premise to attack because there is no consistent line of reasoning. In a previous post you said that "The amillennialist arrives at this view of no distinction between Israel and the church in salvation or in Revelation from scripture.". The problem there is that you do NOT arrive at the view, you START with that view and interpret everything around it. The convolution/conflation of the Body of Christ with Israel is a foundational presupposition, not an arrived at conclusion that is based on a rational progression from premise to premise to final conclusion.

If you think that claim to be false then show me! Show me the syllogism that has as its conclusion "The Body of Christ and Israel are the same thing."

You aren't the first amillennialist that I've debated, Arial, and that isn't the first time I've asked for such an argument. If you present one, you will be the first to do so but you won't because no such argument exists.


You are flatly delusional, Arial! I was very much so intentionally NOT insulting in that post! I commented on the manner that you do doctrine but its not as if you came up with it yourself. Every amillennialist does the exact same thing. And then I asked you questions.

Where are the insults?


You must surely be projecting. There was no hatred in my post. There wasn't even any anger or even frustration. I simply responded to what you said with the only thing I could think to say and asked pertinent questions that were directly related to your own statements.

Maybe you need to find a different hobby. Sheesh!

The only hot air here is this post you've written. There isn't any substance here! Nothing but you ranting about imagined insults that don't exist.


You know what, Arial, the fact of the matter is that you are a liar. Of the two of us, it is you who have done NOTHING to support your ridiculous doctrine. You've not made a single cogent argument. The closest you came was to make the claim that the 144,000 somehow includes Gentiles because of something Paul said in a totally different book of the bible. There wasn't anything said that supports such a connection being made and the fact that John specifically lists off the Twelve Tribes of Israel is completely ignored and not dealt with at all. And that is literally the closest you've come to making an actual argument to support a single aspect of the doctrine you supposedly started this thread to discuss. While I, on the other hand, have not only expressed my objections but have explained WHY I object and am entirely willing, able and even eager to further explain any particular point that you might feel needs further expanation or support. But you don't go there! You wouldn't dare give me an specific point that needs further establishment. Oh no! That would present to both you and the world that I am not the jackass you seem to need me to be!



YOU ARE A TOTAL LIAR!!!!

You want me to believe that you just happen to accidentally quote the guy who everyone in the theological world knows set the bar when it comes to the study of the bible's use of numbers?! And on what planet is it changing the subject away from the biblical use of numbers when someone brings up the guy who literally wrote the book on the subject? I mean, seriously!

Give me a break! The truth is that you didn't think I was familiar enough with Bullinger's work to notice your slight rewording of his writing.

You are truly you own worst enemy, Arial. Everyone now knows that you're an emotionally fragile fool who tells obvious lies and believes whatever the heck she wants regardless of what the bible actually says!

Great job!


P.S.

Arial here is no different than any other knob that desides that the bible doesn't mean what it says. They all, universally, crash and burn. Some in more emotionally spectacular ways than others but at the end of the day its all the same. People who think that God isn't smart enough to write a book that means what it seems to mean are all equally doomed to the same embarrassing fate as Arial. They all come to a place where their contentions are shown to be the indefensible pretensions that they actually are. Why such people ever have the desire to show up on a debate forum, I'll never know.

Ultra dispensationalism: (from gotquestions,org) "According to ultra-dispensationalism, the four Gospels are for Jews only and have no bearing on the church. The book of Acts deals with a different 'church" and is not the body of Christ. Only the prison of Paul are directed to the body of Christ or "mystery" church. Not even the book of Revelation addresses the church---the letters of the seven churches are written to the Jewish church of the tribulation."

Are you maybe starting all your theories with what you have read and what you have heard and then planting those things in the Bible? Are your beliefs original with you or is what you were taught and so believe? When you say the things almost exactly as is said above----are you simply quoting something off the internet? (By the way, if something has a meaning in the Bible such as the number 12, and this meaning is discerned from its uses by God in the Bible, if someone gives an explanation of the meaning, they are all going to say the same thing in similar language. So once again deeply flawed thinking on your part.) But lets continue.

A quote from the same article quoted above. The quote is from a strong dispensationalist, H. A. Ironside and is from his book, "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth" He says that he "no hesitancy in saying that [ultra dispensationalism's] fruits are evil. It has produced a tremendos crop of heresies throughout the length and breadth of this and other lands; it had divided Christians and wrecked churches and assemblies without number, it has lifted up its votaries in intellectual and spiritual pride to an appalling extent, so that they look with extreme contempt upon Christians who do not accept their peculiar views, and instances where it has been long tolerated, it has absolutely throttled Gospel effort at home and sown discord of missionary fields abroad. So true are these things of this system that I have no hesitancy in saying it is an absolutely Satanic perversion of the truth." (emphasis mine.) These are not my words. They are a quote from a dispensationalist.

Then we have this from Jesus Himself : Matt 7: 15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruit.

Add to that to make a hodge podge of scriptural teaching rather than consistency, open theism, which flatly denies much of what God says about Himself---and really I would be an utter fool to even consider anything you put forth.

 

[Arial]

Symbols always point to realities.

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

Yes they do. The question them becomes, what reality do they point to. If 12 is a symbol of something, and we see a perfect balance, 12 tribes, 12,000 per tribe equaling 144,000 (not just 12 tribes but 12,000 each) then the numbers must be representing something, unless one wants to say that 144,000 is also literal. Only that many Jews are saved and it is only that 144,00 who will be alive reigning with Christ in a literal 1000 year period. In which case by the way, there would be nobody left for Satan to deceive when he was released. And no nations, just Israel.

Also, to your second statement; it also doesn't mean that not all things are symbolic.

God chose that number for the nation of Israel.

That presumes that the book of Revelation is written only for Jews.

 

[Arial]

Me thinks he protests too much.

Lot of venting when he could have just used an emoticacon (or whatever it is called) maybe this would do. or this

 

[Arial]

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.

Yes, Jesus is the root, and from where did He come? Is 11:1 and there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of its roots.

Is 11:10 And in that day there shall be root of Jesse, which shall stand of an insign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

It is pictorial language to make a point. What is that point?

Is Jesus true Israel? Well He completely met the conditions of the covenant God had with Israel. That would make Him true Israel---faithful Israel. It is only In Christ, and His righteousness (perfect obedience to the covenant) that we become a part of that covenant perfectly kept, and by extension, the children of God, a part of true Israel---in union with True Israel. Spiritual Israel. The true Israel is spiritual.

 

[Arial]

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.

That is assuming there is such a thing as the rapture of the church. I will start a thread on it so people can present their case.
Do you think that God has not been sending judgments on the unbelieving world always? Just because we don't recognize them as being that, does not mean it isn't happening. In fact all the judgments mentioned in Rev except for that final battle, have been occurring since the fall of man. And those who are sealed by God do not receive the mark of the beast----and what is the beast after? Worship. Worship that belongs to God alone. So it it a literal mark---maybe---but the seal of God is not. Is it possible that the number of the beast isn't either? But that it simply means unbelievers, those who worship the beast? And yes, there will be a last day---determined by God----when the door shuts forever. And things are going to get mighty rough as we near that last day. Best be prepared to stand firm and trust God (the message of Revelation) just in case you are wrong about the rapture and you are here.

I didn't respond to the first part of your post because it is just going over old ground we have already covered.

 

[Arial]

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

OK. Then what are the four corners of the earth, and the four winds? The verses about the 144,00 are explicit but that is not the same thing as literal. Just as the world does not literally have four corners.

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.

Why do you assume I haven't done a study of Daniel 7-9? Is it because I don't reach the same conclusions as you do?

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.

He very explicitly said there would be great tribulation. You add the word "the" to nestle into the rapture and seven final years that begin with said rapture, and that seven years you wish to escape but without dying first. This actually seems to be your "hope" that the Bible says Christians have. I don't start with that view and so am able to understand it differently.

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?

Where did Jesus call it The Great Tribulation and where did He say that was a seven year period after the rapture of the church?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Me thinks he protests too much.

Me thinks you aren't contributing anything to the thread with this kind of post.

 

[Right Divider]

Yes they do. The question them becomes, what reality do they point to. If 12 is a symbol of something, and we see a perfect balance, 12 tribes, 12,000 per tribe equaling 144,000 (not just 12 tribes but 12,000 each) then the numbers must be representing something, unless one wants to say that 144,000 is also literal.

Yes, the 12 and the 12,000 are literal. There is nothing to indicate otherwise.

Only that many Jews are saved and it is only that 144,00 who will be alive reigning with Christ in a literal 1000 year period.

The text does not say that.

In which case by the way, there would be nobody left for Satan to deceive when he was released.

No problem. Since the text does NOT say that only 144,000 are left.

And no nations, just Israel.

No problem with the text.

Also, to your second statement; it also doesn't mean that not all things are symbolic.

You cannot wave your magic wand and make all things symbolic for no valid reason.

That presumes that the book of Revelation is written only for Jews.

It is certainly Jewish through and through.

 

[Right Divider]

Ultra dispensationalism: (from gotquestions,org) "According to ultra-dispensationalism, the four Gospels are for Jews only and have no bearing on the church. The book of Acts deals with a different 'church" and is not the body of Christ. Only the prison of Paul are directed to the body of Christ or "mystery" church. Not even the book of Revelation addresses the church---the letters of the seven churches are written to the Jewish church of the tribulation."

Are you maybe starting all your theories with what you have read and what you have heard and then planting those things in the Bible? Are your beliefs original with you or is what you were taught and so believe? When you say the things almost exactly as is said above----are you simply quoting something off the internet? (By the way, if something has a meaning in the Bible such as the number 12, and this meaning is discerned from its uses by God in the Bible, if someone gives an explanation of the meaning, they are all going to say the same thing in similar language. So once again deeply flawed thinking on your part.) But lets continue.

A quote from the same article quoted above. The quote is from a strong dispensationalist, H. A. Ironside and is from his book, "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth" He says that he "no hesitancy in saying that [ultra dispensationalism's] fruits are evil. It has produced a tremendos crop of heresies throughout the length and breadth of this and other lands; it had divided Christians and wrecked churches and assemblies without number, it has lifted up its votaries in intellectual and spiritual pride to an appalling extent, so that they look with extreme contempt upon Christians who do not accept their peculiar views, and instances where it has been long tolerated, it has absolutely throttled Gospel effort at home and sown discord of missionary fields abroad. So true are these things of this system that I have no hesitancy in saying it is an absolutely Satanic perversion of the truth." (emphasis mine.) These are not my words. They are a quote from a dispensationalist.

Then we have this from Jesus Himself : Matt 7: 15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruit.

Add to that to make a hodge podge of scriptural teaching rather than consistency, open theism, which flatly denies much of what God says about Himself---and really I would be an utter fool to even consider anything you put forth.

That post is so full of lies it's difficult to respond to.

Firstly, we are NOT "ultradispensationalists". That is a smear campaign.
Secondly, Ironside is WRONG on a great many things and has his own problem with intellectual and spiritual pride.

We dispensationalists simply read the Bible the way that it is written.

 

[Arial]

Yes, the 12 and the 12,000 are literal. There is nothing to indicate otherwise.

If a person doesn't start from a particular premise, and is willing to admit that there way is not necessarily right, check out other perspectives, then check it against scripture, there is ample indication that it might be otherwise. I have shown one such interpretation and all you have said is it is wrong, you are right. That is not a persuasive argument, or any kind of argument or defense of your position.

The text does not say that.

It would be the natural conclusion to the 144,000 being literal and what follows afterward in Revelation.

No problem. Since the text does NOT say that only 144,000 are left.

See above.

No problem with the text.

What is the problem?

You cannot wave your magic wand and make all things symbolic for no valid reason.

It is not a magic wand and usage of such terms to inflate what is being said or support something you don't even present (just a disagreement). The same would apply to saying "make all things symbolic," and "no valid reason." None of those things apply to the futurist/amillennial perspective.

It is certainly Jewish through and through.

To conclude that because of the OT references in Revelation, therefore the book is written to only Jews, and about Jews, is sloppy to put it mildly. There might be other reasons for all the Jewish references. One of them might be because Jesus is Jewish, the NT was written by believing Jews, and much of it to Jews (but not exclusively for them.) I could probably come up with half a dozen or so more.

 

[glorydaz]

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.

Why don't you just admit that you've been searching the web for ideas to present, and you happened upon a dispensationalist without knowing it.
Clete wasn't changing the topic, he was revealing where you got one of your notions.

 

[glorydaz]

That post is so full of lies it's difficult to respond to.

Firstly, we are NOT "ultradispensationalists". That is a smear campaign.
Secondly, Ironside is WRONG on a great many things and has his own problem with intellectual and spiritual pride.

We dispensationalists simply read the Bible the way that it is written.

Taking the Bible as it's written seems to be the hardest thing for so many people.
Man's ability to explain away the truth is unlimited.

 

[Arial]

That post is so full of lies it's difficult to respond to.

Firstly, we are NOT "ultradispensationalists". That is a smear campaign.
Secondly, Ironside is WRONG on a great many things and has his own problem with intellectual and spiritual pride.

We dispensationalists simply read the Bible the way that it is written.

You, Clete, Glorydaz, Right Divider have all put forth the very things that are a part of ultra-dispensationalists. The two gospels, Paul's letters being only for Gentiles, Peter, James and John only for the Jews etc. Revelation written to and for Jews only. And that did not come from Ironside, but a simple doctrinal statement on ultra-dispensationalism. Hey---if a person criticises Mary Baker Eddy or Christian Science----or anything--- the proponents stand up and yell "Liar. Liar!" So you saying what you said doesn't make it so. If the shoe fits---wear it. And certainly I have seen the exact behavior and attitude towards descent in this forum that Ironside mentions. I realize that you take a little of your beliefs from here and some from there, but some of them also exist in ultra-dispensationalism.

 

[Arial]

Taking the Bible as it's written seems to be the hardest thing for so many people.
Man's ability to explain away the truth is unlimited.

You would be a prime example of that FYI.

 

[glorydaz]

Yes, Jesus is the root, and from where did He come? Is 11:1 and there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of its roots.

Is 11:10 And in that day there shall be root of Jesse, which shall stand of an insign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

It is pictorial language to make a point. What is that point?

Is Jesus true Israel? Well He completely met the conditions of the covenant God had with Israel. That would make Him true Israel---faithful Israel. It is only In Christ, and His righteousness (perfect obedience to the covenant) that we become a part of that covenant perfectly kept, and by extension, the children of God, a part of true Israel---in union with True Israel. Spiritual Israel. The true Israel is spiritual.

No, it simply means that Jesus is LIFE.

Col. 1:16-17 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Jesus is NOT true Israel.

 

[Arial]

Why don't you just admit that you've been searching the web for ideas to present, and you happened upon a dispensationalist without knowing it.
Clete wasn't changing the topic, he was revealing where you got one of your notions.

He changed the topic to be entirely about me. That is changing the topic. If I were searching the web for ideas to present I wouldn't hesitate to say so. ANd what does that have to do with anything anyway? I do search the internet to get information that I don't have. Are you saying you and everybody else in the world doesn't do that? It is a lot easier and faster than going to the library, a lot more intelligent than say--- make everything up in my head. Did you go to school to learn things? Do you listen to a preacher or teacher, read books and get your ideas and beliefs from these things.

I am still waiting for for one of you guys to come up with something besides using deceptive language and these various falacies: strawman, hasty generalization, false dilemma, slothful induction, burden of proof. When you do, I will continue.

 

[glorydaz]

You, Clete, Glorydaz, Right Divider have all put forth the very things that are a part of ultra-dispensationalists. The two gospels, Paul's letters being only for Gentiles, Peter, James and John only for the Jews etc. Revelation written to and for Jews only. And that did not come from Ironside, but a simple doctrinal statement on ultra-dispensationalism. Hey---if a person criticises Mary Baker Eddy or Christian Science----or anything--- the proponents stand up and yell "Liar. Liar!" So you saying what you said doesn't make it so. If the shoe fits---wear it. And certainly I have seen the exact behavior and attitude towards descent in this forum that Ironside mentions. I realize that you take a little of your beliefs from here and some from there, but some of them also exist in ultra-dispensationalism.

You can't even get this right. The "shoe" you spew your venom against is clearly beyond your comprehension. You "realize" nothing, but your ego won't allow you to shut your mouth and learn. That's sad. Really sad.

 

[Arial]

No, it simply means that Jesus is LIFE.

Col. 1:16-17 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Jesus is NOT true Israel.

I doubt He would be very happy to hear you say that. You will say anything just to not agree with me, wouldn't you? Even if it makes no sense. Never mind thinking it through before you say it. The scripture you used to support the statements you made is completely unrelated to the specific thing we were talking about, and you did not even bother to show how they might be connected. And why have you turned this way towards me. I connect it back to the first time you realized I did not and would not agree with you. Out came your claws.