PDA

View Full Version : recapitulation



chrysostom
July 11th, 2014, 03:38 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

Thunder's Muse
July 11th, 2014, 03:58 AM
How many visions were there in total?


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

chrysostom
July 11th, 2014, 04:03 AM
How many visions were there in total?


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

each chapter should be considered a separate vision

Thunder's Muse
July 11th, 2014, 04:08 AM
each chapter should be considered a separate vision


Ok...wow


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

chrysostom
July 11th, 2014, 04:13 AM
each chapter should be considered a separate vision

THEORIGINALBIBLELOOKEDLIKETHIS
SOWEHAVETOASSUME
THEONESWHOADDEDCHAPTERANDVERSE
KNEWWHATTHEYWEREDOING

Thunder's Muse
July 11th, 2014, 04:20 AM
THEORIGINALBIBLELOOKEDLIKETHIS
SOWEHAVETOASSUME
THEONESWHOADDEDCHAPTERANDVERSE
KNEWWHATTHEYWEREDOING



Were the visions all given to the same person?


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

chrysostom
July 11th, 2014, 04:29 AM
Were the visions all given to the same person?


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

that is another thread which will be called

the three johns

the first john received most of them
and
did not know the name Jesus
but
he did know the Lamb of God

chrysostom
July 18th, 2014, 12:23 PM
here augustine comments on recapitulation (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm)

Chapter 36.— The Sixth Rule of Tichonius (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14721d.htm).
52. The sixth rule Tichonius calls the recapitulation, which, with sufficient watchfulness, is discovered in difficult parts of Scripture. For certain occurrences are so related, that the narrative appears to be following the order of time, or the continuity of events, when it really goes back without mentioning it to previous occurrences, which had been passed over in their proper place. And we make mistakes if we do not understand this, from applying the rule here spoken of.

chrysostom
July 30th, 2014, 03:47 AM
more from augustine on tichonius (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm)

Chapter 30.— The Rules of Tichonius the Donatist Examined.

42. One Tichonius, who, although a Donatist himself, has written most triumphantly against the Donatists (and herein showed himself of a most inconsistent disposition, that he was unwilling to give them up altogether), wrote a book which he called the Book of Rules, because in it he laid down seven rules, which are, as it were, keys to open the secrets of Scripture. And of these rules, the first relates to the Lord and His body, the second to the twofold division of the Lord's body, the third to the promises and the law, the fourth to species and genus, the fifth to times, the sixth to recapitulation, the seventh to the devil and his body. Now these rules, as expounded by their author, do indeed, when carefully considered, afford considerable assistance in penetrating the secrets of the sacred writings; but still they do not explain all the difficult passages, for there are several other methods required, which are so far from being embraced in this number of seven, that the author himself explains many obscure passages without using any of his rules; finding, indeed, that there was no need for them, as there was no difficulty in the passage of the kind to which his rules apply.

chrysostom
August 4th, 2014, 04:07 AM
more from augustine

Chapter 2.— Rule for Removing Ambiguity by Attending to Punctuation. (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm)


" let the reader consult the rule of faith which he has gathered from the plainer passages of Scripture, and from the authority of the Church, and of which I treated at sufficient length when I was speaking in the first book about things."

chrysostom
August 16th, 2014, 03:29 AM
each vision should be considered by itself
they are not necessarily in chronological order
now that we have history to guide us
we may be able to put them in order

chrysostom
August 29th, 2014, 06:29 AM
repetition is often used to reinforce learning

recapitulate (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recapitulate)

a : to restate briefly : summarize
b : to give new form or expression to
2
: to repeat the principal stages or phases of

chrysostom
September 21st, 2014, 05:10 AM
we need to repeat what we believe
what we feel is important
back to basics
it is easy to get distracted by what is happening around us
going to church on sunday can help us focus

chrysostom
October 3rd, 2014, 04:35 AM
without recapitulation
an error interpreting one chapter may cause an error in interpreting the next chapter
a good example of this
is
many think chapter 19 is the second coming
and
wrongly conclude that the thousand years won't start until His return
so
they don't even look for it

chrysostom
October 20th, 2014, 02:55 AM
recapitulation

it's worth repeating
but
it's okay
if
you don't get it

chrysostom
November 7th, 2014, 04:10 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

just repeating

JosephR
November 7th, 2014, 04:14 AM
we need to repeat what we believe
what we feel is important
back to basics
it is easy to get distracted by what is happening around us
going to church on sunday can help us focus

worship your SunGod on Sunday...

pagan.. soothsayer of doom to come..

another prophet of disaster.. who says the end is near..

no sense asking when it comes...

no sense asking whos to blame...


let the army of the North the RCC

let the Army of the south the Muslim..

let them go and see the living God and turn to salt..

chrysostom
February 27th, 2015, 05:54 AM
we need to recapitulate

chrysostom
May 30th, 2015, 03:53 PM
this is just a recapitulation

chrysostom
June 14th, 2015, 04:21 AM
Déjà vu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9j%C3%A0_vu)

all over again

chrysostom
October 6th, 2015, 05:38 AM
each chapter of the apocalypse should be evaluated on its own
regardless of what is in the chapter before or after
that is the recapitulation theory

Interplanner
October 6th, 2015, 06:39 AM
each chapter of the apocalypse should be evaluated on its own
regardless of what is in the chapter before or after
that is the recapitulation theory



Not sure about this at all. It should not be done with any literature, because the neighboring chapters provide context and form meaning.

The Rev should not be used to predict world events, and it is should not be used to start any beliefs that are not perfectly clear from ordinary-language passages elsewhere in the NT. It is primarily pastoral for the 1st century Jewish Christians who lost so much in the upheaval of the 1st generation. Like Mk 13 and Mt 24B, it expected the 2nd coming (the final day of earth as we know it) to be right after the destruction of Jerusalem (the wedding feast is right after the stoning of the harlot). But there is an allowance for a delay in Mk 13 and Mt 24B and a complete explanation in 2 Pet 3.

If you meant recapitulation in the sense of a repeat of 70 AD in our future, that is pretty far-fetched. None of the key players are in the same position at all that they were in 66 when the Jewish War (obviously of 1st century times) started, and ended in doom in 70 AD.

Interplanner
October 6th, 2015, 06:42 AM
just repeating



If that's recapitulation, I would have to conclude that Victorinus had an attention disorder.

chrysostom
October 6th, 2015, 06:58 AM
The Rev should not be used to predict world events,

I agree but we should not ignore historical events that could be used to help us understand the apocalypse
and
this is clearly being done

chrysostom
October 6th, 2015, 07:00 AM
If that's recapitulation, I would have to conclude that Victorinus had an attention disorder.

many commentaries have adopted this theory of recapitulation believing making sense of the apocalypse without it is impossible

dialm
October 6th, 2015, 05:40 PM
The word sounds like you want Protestants to give back hard earned ground. We are not going to do it. Come and take this hill but we shall not give it.

Interplanner
October 6th, 2015, 08:33 PM
many commentaries have adopted this theory of recapitulation believing making sense of the apocalypse without it is impossible



The Rev says it is about things at hand, quickly, soon. It was a pastoral piece to help Christians in Judea in the 1st century see God's victory over and behind the immediate events and losses. The wedding took place after the harlot was stoned and attacked by the beast, even though they partnered for a while. The final day of judgement and NHNE did not follow right after that, even though even Paul expected it, but was delayed like Mark, Matthew and Peter indicated.

patrick jane
October 6th, 2015, 08:44 PM
How many visions were there in total?


Posted from the TOL App cause that's how I roll.

What is the TOL App I keep hearing about ? Is it for devices only or desktop also ? I hear good things.

exminister
October 7th, 2015, 02:05 AM
The word sounds like you want Protestants to give back hard earned ground. We are not going to do it. Come and take this hill but we shall not give it.

The ground may be hard fought but it's like the king of the hill game except each is standing on separate ground and don't know it.

chrysostom
October 27th, 2015, 12:44 AM
The Rev says it is about things at hand, quickly, soon.

this makes sense
if
it was written by john the baptist

chrysostom
November 8th, 2015, 07:23 AM
the chapters is the apocalypse are not necessarily in chronological order

chrysostom
November 23rd, 2015, 07:37 AM
again

OCTOBER23
November 23rd, 2015, 07:39 AM
Saint Victorinus of Pettau or of Poetovio, died 303 was an Early Christian ecclesiastical writer who flourished about 270, and who was martyred during the persecutions of Emperor Diocletian. A Bishop of Poetovio (modern Ptuj in Slovenia; German: Pettau) in Pannonia, Victorinus is also known as Victorinus Petavionensis, Poetovionensis or Victorinus of Ptuj.[1]
Born probably in Greece on the confines of the Eastern and Western Empires or in Poetovio with rather mixed population, due to its military character, Victorinus spoke Greek better than Latin, which explains why, in St. Jerome's opinion, his works written in the latter tongue were more remarkable for their matter than for their style. He was the first theologian to use Latin for his exegesis. He is one of the earliest church fathers to give any indication against Chiliasm, though he still respects the gathering of the church to Judea. Moreover, his remarks on the twentieth chapter of the Apocalypse stand in contradiction to his commentary on the seventh millennium given in his work On the Creation of the World,[2] possibly indicating a redaction in his Commentary on the Apocalypse,[3] or a change of opinion.
His works were ranked with the apocrypha in the decree, later attributed to Pope Gelasius I, which excluded and anathematized them with that of many other early fathers. That is to say they were not considered free of error.[4] By contrast, St. Jerome gives him an honourable place in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers. Victorinus composed commentaries on various books of Holy Scripture, such as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Habakkuk, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, St. Matthew, and the Apocalypse, besides treatises against the heresies of his time.

All his works have disappeared save his Commentary on Apocalypse and short tract On the construction of the world ('De fabrica mundi). It is agreed among scholars, that these texts are really a remnant of his works. The Migne edition, in Patrologia Latina V (1844) 301–344, is considered no more reliable, since the discovery of an important codex by Haussleiter (edition in CSEL 49, 1916), the reference however is to be taken rather from the new critical edition by M. Dulaey in SCh 421 (1997). It is incorrect to regard him as the author of two poems,De Jesu Christo and De Pascha, which are included in the collection of Fabricius.
Victorinus' memorial day in both the Eastern and Western Churches is 2 November. Until the 17th century he was likewise confused with the Latin rhetorician, Victorinus Afer.

Wikpedia

chrysostom
November 23rd, 2015, 08:02 AM
nice cut and paste oct23

thanks for not posting his whole commentary

chrysostom
December 14th, 2015, 04:44 AM
the chapters of the apocalypse are not necessarily chronological
so
each chapter must be evaluated all by itself

bybee
December 14th, 2015, 07:24 AM
the chapters is the apocalypse are not necessarily in chronological order

Is Revelation about ultimate salvation of the believer?

chrysostom
December 14th, 2015, 07:33 AM
Is Revelation about ultimate salvation of the believer?

among other things
yes
it is about knowing our works
and
we will be held accountable
but
the primary point of the apocalypse
is
that good will triumph over evil
the good guys will win
whether or not we as individuals overcometh

chrysostom
January 6th, 2016, 05:43 AM
again

please don't delete

chrysostom
January 27th, 2016, 07:13 AM
recapitulate this

Interplanner
January 27th, 2016, 07:43 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)



The theory has a fundamental flaw. Mt24A etc is about 1st century Judea. B is about the worldwide judgement. It is originally expressed as B following right after A but a delay is allowed. We know the delay is in effect...because here we are. The delay is explained in 2 Pet 3. Like the other NT "2nd coming/judgement day" passages in ordinary (non-symbolic) writing, there is nothing future to happen in Judea. Rom 2, 8, 11, I Cor 15, Heb 9, Acts 17, 2 Tim 4, etc.

The Rev was a pastoral presentation so that 1st century Judean Christians could understand why the 'harlot' was being 'stoned' and could enjoy the 'wedding' of the true wife afterwards. It is not for modern prognostication in general. There is a short worldwide rebellion coming (or going on) which harrasses all Christians all over the world, defeated magnificently by the appearing of Christ.

chrysostom
January 27th, 2016, 07:57 AM
The theory has a fundamental flaw.

don't understand what you see as the flaw

HisServant
January 27th, 2016, 09:10 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

A theory is just that... something that someone pulled out of their rear and is of little value.

chrysostom
February 17th, 2016, 05:11 AM
A theory is just that... something that someone pulled out of their rear and is of little value.

they actually have an argument

you need one

chrysostom
March 16th, 2016, 02:10 PM
each vision of the apocalypse should be evaluated independent of the others

chrysostom
March 30th, 2016, 02:50 AM
without recapitulation
-it is not possible to make sense of the apocalypse
-unless
-you force everything into the future
-which doesn't make sense

chrysostom
April 18th, 2016, 02:04 AM
it's worth repeating

SaulToPaul
April 18th, 2016, 09:34 AM
-you force everything into the future
-which doesn't make sense

it does not fit when you force the square peg into the round hole of history

many details are watered down or ignored to do so

HisServant
April 18th, 2016, 11:02 AM
First of all Victorinus didn't seem to have a grasp of what 1st century Jewish culture and heritage was all about. He used Greek and Latin, but very little Hebrew and was raised in the Greek culture and world view of the 3rd and 4th century and ended up in the Slovenia area. Given his culture and his lack of a 1st century Jewish world view, imposing the non-scriptural principle of recapitulation was probably the only way he could make sense of things.

My current thinking of Revelation (in which I have some scholarly agreement) is that it was written by John at three different parts of his life. The Greek text seems to indicate that he became more and more familiar with the language as he got older.

I currently believe that Revelation is a retrospective using symbolism to denote what had already transpired.

chrysostom
April 18th, 2016, 11:06 AM
My current thinking of Revelation (in which I have some scholarly agreement) is that it was written by John at three different parts of his life. The Greek text seems to indicate that he became more and more familiar with the language as he got older.

so why didn't he use the word antichrist?

HisServant
April 18th, 2016, 11:16 AM
Who... John or Victorinus?

chrysostom
April 18th, 2016, 11:55 AM
Who... John or Victorinus?

john

HisServant
April 18th, 2016, 12:14 PM
Tough question, because I believe that there is not a single Antichrist. All who oppose the gospel, as given, are Antichrist.

So given that Antichrist is a description instead of a title, I wouldn't expect him to use it consistently.

chrysostom
May 16th, 2016, 06:21 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

just repeating

patrick jane
May 16th, 2016, 06:26 AM
Chrys wants the apocalypse to happen in his little lifetime :rotfl:

chrysostom
June 14th, 2016, 04:22 AM
it's worth repeating

SaulToPaul
June 15th, 2016, 08:38 AM
it's worth repeating

Please recapitulate your views on the recapitulation.

chrysostom
July 6th, 2016, 03:20 AM
again?

chrysostom
July 27th, 2016, 02:18 PM
stp recapitulates a lot
-I may have already said that

SaulToPaul
July 28th, 2016, 06:29 AM
stp recapitulates a lot
-I may have already said that

Please recapitulate your views on the recapitulation.

chrysostom
August 22nd, 2016, 09:25 AM
Please recapitulate your views on the recapitulation.

each chapter of the apocalypse should be evaluated all by itself -
regardless of what is in the chapter before or after

chrysostom
September 24th, 2016, 03:52 AM
just google recapitulation (https://www.google.com/search?q=recapitulation&rlz=1CAASUA_enUS700US701&oq=recapitulation&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

chrysostom
October 5th, 2016, 02:11 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

some things need to be recapitulated

chrysostom
October 17th, 2016, 05:43 AM
here it is again

DavidK
October 17th, 2016, 10:05 AM
THEORIGINALBIBLELOOKEDLIKETHIS
SOWEHAVETOASSUME
THEONESWHOADDEDCHAPTERANDVERSE
KNEWWHATTHEYWEREDOING

Why would we have to assume that?

You can add spaces and punctuation without breaking it into chapters and verses. Scripture existed and was used without chapter and verse for over a millenium.

chrysostom
October 28th, 2016, 03:46 AM
Why would we have to assume that?


because we can't prove it

DavidK
October 28th, 2016, 07:27 AM
because we can't prove it

What if they didn't know what they were doing? Who was Stephen Langton? Who was Robert Estienne?

How did the church get by without chapters and verses for a whole millenium?

Mysteries.

SaulToPaul
October 28th, 2016, 07:42 AM
I need a recap on the recapitulation.

chrysostom
October 28th, 2016, 09:19 AM
How did the church get by without chapters and verses for a whole millenium?


no problem, it is what the church says it is

DavidK
October 28th, 2016, 12:21 PM
no problem, it is what the church says it is

You are very reliable.

SimpleMan77
October 28th, 2016, 12:26 PM
no problem, it is what the church says it is

Not sure about your theology, JEB!, but I liked you as a governor of Florida.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=78367)

chrysostom
November 7th, 2016, 10:27 AM
Not sure about your theology, JEB!, but I liked you as a governor of Florida.



hillary would not be our next president
-if-
he were the republican nominee

SimpleMan77
November 7th, 2016, 01:03 PM
hillary would not be our next president
-if-
he were the republican nominee

I think any of the field would probably have been a shoo-in. Unfortunately we ended up with one of the only ones who has a real shot at losing it.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL (https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=78367)

chrysostom
November 21st, 2016, 07:11 AM
and to repeat
-
I am hopeful but not optimistic
-and-
somehow is feels good

chrysostom
December 5th, 2016, 06:09 AM
repeat it
-if-
it is important

chrysostom
December 13th, 2016, 05:37 AM
it is important

chrysostom
December 23rd, 2016, 06:01 AM
again

chrysostom
January 5th, 2017, 03:56 PM
victorinus and recapitulation (https://books.google.com/books?id=GWPV4-A9Kr0C&pg=PR24&lpg=PR24&dq=recapitulation+which+is+accepted+by+most+commen taries+since+victorinus&source=bl&ots=GuqfJfMlzR&sig=qAcRUcZqiSIbGcCEWM-rNFOqxMo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX_46N_qvRAhVqwVQKHcj-CaIQ6AEIMDAE#v=onepage&q=recapitulation%20which%20is%20accepted%20by%20mo st%20commentaries%20since%20victorinus&f=false)

chrysostom
January 21st, 2017, 07:02 AM
the visions contained in the apocalypse are not in chronological order
-
the biggest misunderstanding is
-Jesus comes in chapter 19
-Jesus reigns in chapter 20
-
it doesn't say Jesus will reign
it does say they will reign with Christ

chrysostom
February 23rd, 2017, 05:49 AM
whatever you think happens is chapter 19 should not determine what you think happens in chapter 20
-
they are separate visions
-and-
must be evaluated separately

SaulToPaul
February 23rd, 2017, 07:34 AM
whatever you think happens is chapter 19 should not determine what you think happens in chapter 20
-
they are separate visions
-and-
must be evaluated separately

:chuckle:

chrysostom
March 23rd, 2017, 01:03 PM
:chuckle:

another great post by stp

SaulToPaul
March 23rd, 2017, 01:21 PM
another great post by stp

Can you provide a recap on your recapitulation of the recapitulation?

patrick jane
March 23rd, 2017, 01:34 PM
another great post by stpWhere have you been my friend? Eating?

SaulToPaul
March 23rd, 2017, 01:37 PM
Where have you been my friend? Eating?

Isn't chrys in the middle of Lint?

chrysostom
April 25th, 2017, 05:32 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

this is a recapitulation

Zeke
April 25th, 2017, 06:05 AM
More outward distractions to a inward event Luke 17:20-21. Secular history isn't what the scriptures are teaching.

Sent from my A462C using TheologyOnline mobile app ('https://siteowners.tapatalk.com/byo/displayAndDownloadByoApp?rid=78367')

chrysostom
May 29th, 2017, 03:27 AM
Secular history isn't what the scriptures are teaching.


we are talking about prophecy

Truster
May 29th, 2017, 04:05 AM
The resumptive interpretation is correct. It is the only method that explains what is going on around us and what has happened historically. It also opens the eyes to the future.

Zeke
May 29th, 2017, 07:47 AM
we are talking about prophecy

Nothing new under the sun Ecclesiastes 1:9. So the outward focus on worldly events shows Luke 17:2-21, Acts 17:24, 1Cor 3:16, ect hasn't pierced the programming of this worlds religious rulers that keep one a slave to tradtion Galatians 4:1, 2Cor 3:6.

chrysostom
July 4th, 2017, 04:05 AM
the visions of the apocalypse are not in chronological order

chrysostom
August 3rd, 2017, 01:25 PM
the visions of the apocalypse are not in chronological order

this is important

oatmeal
August 3rd, 2017, 01:41 PM
THEORIGINALBIBLELOOKEDLIKETHIS
SOWEHAVETOASSUME
THEONESWHOADDEDCHAPTERANDVERSE
KNEWWHATTHEYWEREDOING

We should never assume

They did not know what they were doing.

That they guessed can be easily demonstrated.

Chapters and verses hold no authority

chrysostom
August 11th, 2017, 07:33 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)

without recapitulation the apocalypse cannot be understood and you are forced to put everything into the future
-also-
you might believe babylon falls just before the second coming and the thousand years follows that
-it is not easy being a futurist

SaulToPaul
August 11th, 2017, 08:43 AM
without recapitulation the apocalypse cannot be understood and you are forced to put everything into the future
-also-
you might believe babylon falls just before the second coming and the thousand years follows that
-it is not easy being a futurist

:chuckle:

Sounds like a harebrained scheme.

chrysostom
August 11th, 2017, 09:29 AM
:chuckle:

Sounds like a harebrained scheme.

I know you are against work
-but-
if you do the work -
you might find something in history that fulfills a reasonable interpretation of prophecy

SaulToPaul
August 11th, 2017, 10:02 AM
I know you are against work
-but-
if you do the work -
you might find something in history that fulfills a reasonable interpretation of prophecy

I am not willing to leave out 90% of the details of a prophecy to make it "fit" history.

chrysostom
August 11th, 2017, 10:10 AM
I am not willing to leave out 90% of the details of a prophecy to make it "fit" history.

just give me one specific detail

SaulToPaul
August 11th, 2017, 10:12 AM
just give me one specific detail

Nope. The prophecies are in your Bible. Write down each detail, and think about it.

Tambora
August 11th, 2017, 10:59 AM
I am not willing to leave out 90% of the details of a prophecy to make it "fit" history.Atta boy!

Interplanner
August 13th, 2017, 07:29 AM
Recapitulation is a theory developed to improve our understanding of the Apocalypse. Victorinus of Pettau (https://www.google.com/search?q=Victorinus+of+Pettau&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs) in the third century was the first to show the same events were being repeated in different visions. Therefore the sequence of chapters cannot be considered necessarily in chronological order. Most commentaries on the Apocalypse have adopted this theory. It has also been described as parallelism

see what augustine had to say about this (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3975526#post3975526)

back to
the apocalypse (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102616)







The Rev was a pastoral encouragement to early churches to endure through the horrible events of the 7th decade in Judea. It can still be used pastorally for persecution etc, and songs can be used for worship. But there isn't going to be an exact repeat of those events otherwise known as the desolation of Israel, Dan 8, 9.

chrysostom
September 6th, 2017, 04:34 AM
The Rev was a pastoral encouragement to early churches to endure through the horrible events of the 7th decade in Judea.
why not the 7th century?
-but-
this is about recapitulation which helps us understand the apocalypse by pointing out that the chapters are not necessarily in chronological order
-so-
each vision should be evaluated on its own
-and-
is not dependent on what transpired in the previous chapter
-
many here think that the return of Jesus in chapter 19
means He reigns in chapter 20
-but-
it doesn't say that in chapter 20