the apocalypse

chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
that was nice

what was nice?

what arsenios said

yes it was

you should be able to appreciate those who don't agree with you

some of them make it real easy

don't you wonder how that happens?

yes I do

well what do you think?

I can only speculate

I love it when you speculate

I think it has to do with sincerity

interesting

that helps to
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
chrysostom said:
that was nice

what was nice?

what arsenios said

yes it was

you should be able to appreciate those who don't agree with you

some of them make it real easy

don't you wonder how that happens?

yes I do

well what do you think?

I can only speculate

I love it when you speculate

I think it has to do with sincerity

interesting

that helps to
Click to expand...

Thank-you...

Without sincerity there is nothing...

A.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
so when are you going to get back to the apocalypse?

when I am inspired

don't you have to force it?

it is better if you don't

there must be a way to get back on track

reading a book can do it

I feel like I have read them all

so read them again

that is a good idea
 
Arsenios

Arsenios

Well-known member
chrysostom said:
so when are you going to get back to the apocalypse?

when I am inspired

don't you have to force it?

it is better if you don't

there must be a way to get back on track

reading a book can do it

I feel like I have read them all
Click to expand...

So have you read this one?

The Apocalypse: In the Teachings of Ancient Christianity
by Averky Taushev, Seraphim Rose (Translator)

What did you think of it?

A.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Arsenios said:
Yes -

It is the future history of the Church of God...

Of the Body of Christ upon this earth...

Great dia-mono-logue, btw...

Kinda Charlie-Brown-esque in its own way...

I am glad you are posting it...

Arsenios
Click to expand...

old folks always want the apocalypse to happen before they die :juggle:
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Revelation 1:1 (KJV)

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
Write the things which "THOU HAST SEEN"(past tense to John when he received Rev.),,,and things "WHICH ARE"(present tense to John when he received Rev.),,,and the things "WHICH SHALL BE HEREAFTER",,,(Revelations 1:19 KJV)

Some say the Revelation is dated about ad96, some date before the destruction of the temple in July ad70. but the fact(to us) is the same that is,,,

If this Revelation was given to John around ad70-96 (AND) Revelations 1:19 KJV states that what John was writing is/are things he had seen,things that are,and things that will come to pass then it is broken down into THREE GROUPS,,,past, present and future (in aspect to John when he was on Patmos around 2000 years ago)...

So there are a set of groups of things written in Revelations,,,

(1) things that had already happened,that John had already seen take place at the time of the writing(approx.ad95). i.e. things that were already historical and were being written from a past tense stance.

(2) things that are(in aspect to the timing when John was given this),i.e. the current things happening in the world during the days when John was on Patmos (present tense to John in those days)...

(3) things which shall be hereafter,,,future tense prophecy in aspect to the time when John was on Patmos i.e. the things that had not yet taken place in "that day" and were to be fulfilled in the future(between ad96 and now/approx.)

So if there are three set's of tenses that are told to John to be written what parts of Revelations were happening in John's days(that are recorded in Revelations),,,which things had already taken place when John was told to write this. And then the remainder are the future tense portion of the Revelation.

p.s. the "apostolic fathers" writings in my opinion also bare on this matter because they record a historical witness to the events that shortly take place and many of their writers give opinions as to weather they thought these certain things were to still take place,or if they were already fulfilled in aspect to the historical witness of the things/events taking place during their lives.
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
Say for instance,,,

in Revelations 7:3 KJV if this angel/angels are told to "not hurt" ect. until "after",(future tense) those who would be sealed were sealed,then they cannot do this hurt they are given to do until "after",,,the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads.

Again if the plagues that are poured out in that day are NOT poured out on the servants of God who are sealed in their foreheads but instead on those who worshiped the image of the beast (OR) had the name (OR) had the number of his name then the two horned beast in Revelations 13 must come after the 7 headed beast and the head that is wounded unto death(Revelations 17:8 KJV) .

So at the time Revelations 17:8 was written the beast that was and was not yet is had already been in the worlds history(past tense) and was in the pit(present tense when this was told to John) and as the angel states to John in Revaluation 17:8 "SHALL ASCEND OUT OF THE BOTTOMLESS PIT"ect.,,,,but it at the time this was stated to John had already been,was wounded unto death,and was (in) the bottomless pit(present tense) to approx.ad96.

Now the plagues,vial's,woe's ect. that are poured out on those who received the mark of the beast cannot happen until after the beast ascends out of the pit and his image is set up(he was in the pit in ad96 so it could only happen after this point in history in aspect to when John received this) and so this is in the portion of rev. 1:19 "which must shortly come to pass",,and not something John had seen or was seeing going on during the days he was on Patmos(ad96).

Again these were written to the 7 churches in Asia so they had already been established by the apostles and were according to the things stated to the 7 Churches were in a state of "decline",hence the corrections mentioned by Jesus to be told to them by John. So these things John had already seen,or they were still going on at the time of the writing of the Revelation.
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
So if the plagues are poured out on those who worship the image,or have the number of his name,or have the name of the beast then he must first come. before he can come the two horned best must rise,or else how can the two horned beast say "let us make an image of the beast that was ect.",,,

Many say this is the end and point to earthquakes,volcanoes erupting,oil spills,wars ect. and say that they are the "plagues of God" but oooppps! if these are the plagues of God being poured out on those who have the mark,ect. then everyone is already sealed i.e. cannot happen until they BOTH ARE SEALED,, those who are sealed with Gods mark in their forehead AND those who receive the mark of the beast.

So if it is so that these things we see taking place today are THE PLAGUES OF GOD then all are already sealed and the Christian Church has not yet realized what the mark,image,name of the beast actually is,,and so hence probably already has it and don't understand they do.

But for those who rather see the events as plagues poured out on those who can buy and sell because they already have the number,name,ect. well then open your wallets and purses and see if you(the whole world) have a number that represents your name,gives you the right to buy and sell worldwide that you have in your forehead and that you give proof of with your right hand when you make a purchase.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
you might be interested in the oldest commentary on the apocalypse

Commentary on the Apocalypse (Victorinus)

what is so interesting about it
is
he doesn't mention any of the seven churches
he doesn't mention antipas

he does mention patmos
but
not until he comments on chapter ten
so
it could be information that he has independent of his copy of the apocalypse
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
chrysostom said:
you might be interested in the oldest commentary on the apocalypse

Commentary on the Apocalypse (Victorinus)

what is so interesting about it
is
he doesn't mention any of the seven churches
he doesn't mention antipas

he does mention patmos
but
not until he comments on chapter ten
so
it could be information that he has independent of his copy of the apocalypse
Click to expand...

yes, mine own self I was drawn more to Polycarpus,Ignatious,Clement of Rome,Barnabas ect. not that they say a whole lot but the tense they use seems to always be future in aspect to the Mill. But also others as you point out (lol) Victorinus from ad270-300? is about the point where the shift from Chillism to amill. began(controversial I know) but I will read it none the less.

Not that I disagree with you at all though I think some of the early letters and some others as time went on might be a "foggy grey area",lol some others from 500ad ect. I have read and thought "hmm,he seems to understand but some of the others around him may have not". I say this because as we know there are also books from the other spectrum i.e. "valentinus,marconian ect." who believed they knew and also wrote letters so from around Irenaeus back seems to be of one opinion and the way some believed seemed to deviate a little after this point in time.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
whitestone said:
yes, mine own self I was drawn more to Polycarpus,Ignatious,Clement of Rome,Barnabas ect. not that they say a whole lot but the tense they use seems to always be future in aspect to the Mill. But also others as you point out (lol) Victorinus from ad270-300? is about the point where the shift from Chillism to amill. began(controversial I know) but I will read it none the less.

Not that I disagree with you at all though I think some of the early letters and some others as time went on might be a "foggy grey area",lol some others from 500ad ect. I have read and thought "hmm,he seems to understand but some of the others around him may have not". I say this because as we know there are also books from the other spectrum i.e. "valentinus,marconian ect." who believed they knew and also wrote letters so from around Irenaeus back seems to be of one opinion and the way some believed seemed to deviate a little after this point in time.
Click to expand...

victorinus is important when you add it to what eusebius wrote in his church history
eusebius mentions most of the seven churches of the apocalypse but never acknowledges the connection to the apocalypse
eusebius doesn't mention antipas but seems to mention all the other martyrs
eusebius also mention ancient copies of the apocalypse referred to by irenaeus

all this suggests more than one version of the apocalypse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top