Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: RnMomof7; CCWoody; Matchett-PI; OrthodoxPresbyterian; the_doc; jude24
" Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.

Close of Vision...now the explaination of it end of the vision(again past tense)"

So your defense that John 'closes' his vision is that he claims that vs 4 is the 'first resurrection'???? That's it? Why does the fact that John makes mention that vs 4 is the "first resurrection" ~necessitate~ a 'closing' of the vision? I don't get it.

Furthermore, you now claim that the "future" tense in vs 6-9 ~necissitate~ the understanding that these verses are simply an 'explanation' or 'interpretation' of the previous 5 verses???

That leaves you with a big problem. In 8b and 9 we see the mention of the 'war' of Gog/Magog. This was ~NOT~ mentioned before in Rev 20. It is ~new~ to the vision. ~IF~ this were a recapitulation of John's previous vision, then we ~MUST~ conclude that this is an explanation of 19:17-21.

Unfortunatley, this would require you to reject Historic Premillennialims claim of a battle at the end of the millennium since this is 'obviously' an explanation of John's previous statements of the battle in Ch. 19!

~Rather~, vs 8b and 9 are ~NEW~ descriptions of events to take place which were in relation to the previously mentioned future release of Satan from his binding to 'deceive the nations again'. Notice, in vs 3 we ~also~ have the description of Satan's release spoken of as a prediction of the future from John's standpoint in his vision. It uses, as does vs 6, future tense to describe the realities to come to pass of something from John's relative point of refernce in the vision.

'Future tense' in Revelelation does ~NOT~ indicate a recapitulation or interpretation or explanation of the events previously discussed.

It would be kind of silly for John in an "explanation" or "interpretation" of vs 4's "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" that "they shall be priests of God and of Christ and shall reign with him a thousand years".

~WOW~! That really really cleared things up! I didn't know what John meant by 'they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years'. Now, thanks to John's explanation, I know that 'they lived and reinged with Christ a thousand years' means that 'they shall be priests of God and of Christ and shall reign with him a thousand years'. That really cleared things up! I wouldn't have been able to see what John was talking about without that explanation! (Sarcasm intended -but with all due respect- to make a point).

Talk about 'stating the obvious'!

Mom, Rev is 'filled' with referneces to future events from John's relative perspective in his vision:

Revelation 5:10
And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. Is -this- an explanation of John's previous vision? Or Or Is it a prophetic glimpse of things to come which have not yet taken place with respect to John's relative place in his vision?

Revelation 7:17
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Is this an explanation of John's previous vision? Or Is it a prophetic glimpse of things to come which have not yet taken place with respect to John's relative place in his vision?

1,787 posted on 09/25/2002 12:40:00 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1439 | View Replies ]


To: Jean Chauvin
Nice post Jean..but you have still not explained why John stopped in the middle of his discourse and changed tenses..
1,798 posted on 09/25/2002 1:47:14 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1787 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson