You are very welcome Grace, thank you for taking the time to read my posts, sometimes I do not have the time to keep re-editing them down to the most essential information so it sounds like I am rambling and I feel bad about that, but it is a lot of work to edit it down to the essentials, I try to do the best I can.
I include the scripture references and sometimes the entire scripture itself to save people the time of having to look them up themselves, but I recommend looking them up yourself because you make it your own that way
I always try to use the clearest verses so that there is very little wiggle room, and if you look at comments on my posts, there are few times when others respond with scriptures, because I try to present an airtight case with clear scriptures
It's hard to argue against clear scriptures and sound reasoning
Again, thank you for your kind words, they are very much appreciated
Thank you Grace, I appreciate your kind words, I try to post interesting, informative content, it's nice to be appreciated, thank you
GS, I get confused a lot about life, after death. Some churches claim, you have to be Christian, while others claim, you don't. Even Pope Francis claims it's better to be an atheist, than a hypothetical Christian. I'm not Catholic, but I do like Pope Francis.
Hello - I was reading through this thread and it is very interesting. I'm glad we are talking more about faith and Revelations and topics of weight rather than forum rules, where posts go, and politics. It's a better discussion.
Before digging into specific Revelations verses, I was going to comment at a high level. I've read that book over a number of years, heard teachings on it, read commentaries on it. In general, the title tells what it is - "Revelations" - of Paul - pictures of his into the future many times. We could get completely sidetracked on another topic to discuss what a "revelation" is and how exactly does this fit into the Way's scheme of "9 manifestations" with phrases like "all 9 all the time", and what they say revelation is, compared to mainstream Christianity.
I mean I could spout off for a page or two I suppose about "foretelling" or "forthtelling" or a number of other VP gnat swallowing a camel scriptural manipulations, but getting right down to what is going on, Paul is seeing some visions. God's showing them to him. They have some very wild, different, and non-standard terms and imagery not found other places in the Bible. How does this work? I reject the Way's hypothesis of The Great Spirit and the lesser spirit. God finds a way to let Paul know, let Paul see. Leave it at that. Can we see the same things? Probably not. I didn't have those dreams, Paul did.
But they are very detailed. I have read through an entire fictional series called the "Left Behind" series, detailing out an author's view of how the book of Revelations unfolds. 16 novels. And my impression after reading them is that the fictional author took far less liberties with what people literally saw in his novels than most commentators do writing their commentary on the book of Revelation.
I absolutely believe that God would have to accommodate freedom of will by rewarding those that do not accept Christ according to their heart and how they live justly. Humans have since Christ's death used Christianity as a license to sin, then ask forgiveness. By sheer logic, if there is a God, and He is what is written about Him, He has to be just and fair. I'm not sure if I can absolutely pinpoint this to specific scripture. But I will present a caveat. I am no longer a fundamentalist. So all of the "perfectly fits together never contradicts hand in a glove" BS doesn't fly with me.
Next, "working scriptures" or doing "word studies" or other types of activities like I did in the Way have taken on a different color. No longer am I trying to shoehorn 2 Greek words into a meaning that is 2 sizes too small, or comparing the Septuagint greek OT translation with the "Aramaiac" "Pedangta" texts and seeing how they match up when written from a completely opposite cultural point of view.
Anyway throwing that out there up front. I'll get to the detail too but it takes me a little longer with this outlook and approach.
Building on this, the first supporting section of scripture for this idea is Rev. 20:11-15. This section of scripture is known commonly as the "Great White Throne" judgement. So there are different judgments and times according to theologians.
It does seem that most commonly the "Great White Throne" judgment is for all, not just Christians - in direct reading, commentary, and interpretations written of those verses. Being for all, those who lived virtuously would be rewarded regardless of their beliefs.
Chockfull, I agree with you on this (except it's Revelation, not Revelations):
1 hour ago, chockfull said:
I'm glad we are talking more about faith and Revelations and topics of weight rather than forum rules, where posts go, and politics. It's a better discussion.
But I have to disagree with you on this:
1 hour ago, chockfull said:
In general, the title tells what it is - "Revelations" - of Paul - pictures of his into the future many times.
It was John, not Paul...or George or Ringo....sorry, couldn't resist, just for Fun damental reasons:
Rev 1:1 - "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:"
"Fun damentalism hath its benefits, chiefly amongst them is accuracy of truth..." ~ author unknown
Chockfull, I agree with you on this (except it's Revelation, not Revelations):
But I have to disagree with you on this:
It was John, not Paul...or George or Ringo....sorry, couldn't resist, just for Fun damental reasons:
Rev 1:1 - "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:"
"Fun damentalism hath its benefits, chiefly amongst them is accuracy of truth..." ~ author unknown
typo on Paul - I was thinking John but fingers typed Paul.
Topically and sequentially, there actually were multiple revelations John recorded - I was describing them as a collection, not as the title of a book. This means that first word which I used in my sentence should not have been capitalized as the title of the book I included later accurately in the singular. That was my intent as the author of the sentence.
Please tell me you have more to say about the substance of my posts other than being a grammar Nazi.
On 3/4/2018 at 10:33 AM, Infoabsorption said:
GoldStar, I admit that the tree of life may be a literal tree, I'm just skeptical of it being literal. It's one of those issues I'm not sure about. Maybe others could chime in and give us some insight. But regarding the time statements within Revelation (if you look at the Greek and not the translation) there is not much gray area there.
Well, perhaps this won't mean much to some of you... but the combination of how our senses (conditioned from birth) mind works and the way scripture might be intentional written (at times or in certain places) makes is far too easy to miss or overlook... let's just say... "enough" of the truth, that there's undoubtedly a much larger "gray area" here than some might like or care for.
For instance... this whole issue of something being "literal" or not. If I write, "there's a fork in the road..." what do I mean, exactly? What literal fork in the road might you think of or imagine? A metal utensil of some sort... or the juncture of one road becoming two? Which of these do you say is more "literal," and why? What do you depend on to make that determination?
So... when it comes around to discussing/communicating spiritual realities, what definitions or "realities" are used to make the assessment whether something is figurative or literal? The commonly accepted practice seems to be to simply call something "figurative" whenever and where ever a perceived literal meaning doesn't make sense or fit with previously constructed (or accepted) theology, with insufficient thought ever more honestly given to what reality it might rather appropriately refer to "literally." And, if anyone thinks that there's nothing spiritual that can be spoken of or referred to in a "literal" sense... perhaps that's merely evidence of the carnal (sense knowledge) mind's failure to see and think in terms of deeper, otherwise invisible, perspectives on life.
Think the only 'literal' tree that grows or exists in this world is one that is constructed of cellulose? Then you are in no better shape than one wired to think the only "literal" fork in the road is a metal utensil. And that's just the physical side of this, with no thought or consideration being given to what it can or might refer to spiritually.
Anything that we read regardless of the subject or content. It is best to read enough content to understand the meaning. Here is a very positive section of Revelation chapter 22 as it relates to seeing and following Jesus Christ. And this sections ends with "they will reign for ever and ever". I have studied the Greek words here. Using a more literal translation "ever and ever" is "age and age".
From Thayer's Greek Lexicon this is #165, aioon. The definition is age, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity.
22 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
This section mentions "the throne of God and of the lamb". This is referring to Jesus Christ the savior of mankind. The first man from the dead to live eternally. Many scriptures symbolically refer to Jesus Christ as the lamb of God to mix a mindset from the Old Testament of the sacrifice of animals for the atonement of sin. Referring Jesus Christ as the lamb of God identifies Jesus Christ as "the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world".
Rev. 22 appears to be a description of the eternal state that Mark S. has alluded to with the study of the Greek "ever & ever". The tree of life whether figurative or literal indicates a restored Eden that was lost in Genesis. The healing of the "nations" from the Greek indicates gentiles which brings to mind Isaiah 65 v.17-25. I no longer see the wolves , lions, & serpents described as literal, but symbolic of the Gentiles from an ancient Jewish perspective. In other words the Israelite's and the Gentiles will not be separated spiritually. Compare Romans 15 with Isaiah 11 & 65 and then Rev. 22.
People use figurative or symbolic language sometimes. As an example, when someone says, "it is raining cats and dogs". Does that mean that the speaking person literally says that cats and dogs are coming down from the sky? If it does people like me would try to catch the dogs and Twinky would try to catch the cats so that they do not die. No, it is simply a means of communication that it is raining very hard. The book of Revelation also uses symbolic language.
I hope it is OK to say that there are some good posts on this thread. Does that mean I am now writing about a literal thread used for sewing? Or does it mean I am writing about good posts on this forum? And yes the writer of the book of Revelation also used symbolic language.
On 4/18/2018 at 5:58 AM, Infoabsorption said:
The tree of life whether figurative or literal indicates a restored Eden that was lost in Genesis.
I disagree, as I do not see this as a mere restoration of something which existed previously.
However, I'm not disallowing any possibility for a new Eden, if perceived as the condition of perfection. I just think that any new Garden of God and what He might choose to grow will be different than before.
Recommended Posts
GoldStar
You are very welcome Grace, thank you for taking the time to read my posts, sometimes I do not have the time to keep re-editing them down to the most essential information so it sounds like I am rambling and I feel bad about that, but it is a lot of work to edit it down to the essentials, I try to do the best I can.
I include the scripture references and sometimes the entire scripture itself to save people the time of having to look them up themselves, but I recommend looking them up yourself because you make it your own that way
I always try to use the clearest verses so that there is very little wiggle room, and if you look at comments on my posts, there are few times when others respond with scriptures, because I try to present an airtight case with clear scriptures
It's hard to argue against clear scriptures and sound reasoning
Again, thank you for your kind words, they are very much appreciated
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
GS, I get confused a lot about life, after death. Some churches claim, you have to be Christian, while others claim, you don't. Even Pope Francis claims it's better to be an atheist, than a hypothetical Christian. I'm not Catholic, but I do like Pope Francis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Hello - I was reading through this thread and it is very interesting. I'm glad we are talking more about faith and Revelations and topics of weight rather than forum rules, where posts go, and politics. It's a better discussion.
Before digging into specific Revelations verses, I was going to comment at a high level. I've read that book over a number of years, heard teachings on it, read commentaries on it. In general, the title tells what it is - "Revelations" - of Paul - pictures of his into the future many times. We could get completely sidetracked on another topic to discuss what a "revelation" is and how exactly does this fit into the Way's scheme of "9 manifestations" with phrases like "all 9 all the time", and what they say revelation is, compared to mainstream Christianity.
I mean I could spout off for a page or two I suppose about "foretelling" or "forthtelling" or a number of other VP gnat swallowing a camel scriptural manipulations, but getting right down to what is going on, Paul is seeing some visions. God's showing them to him. They have some very wild, different, and non-standard terms and imagery not found other places in the Bible. How does this work? I reject the Way's hypothesis of The Great Spirit and the lesser spirit. God finds a way to let Paul know, let Paul see. Leave it at that. Can we see the same things? Probably not. I didn't have those dreams, Paul did.
But they are very detailed. I have read through an entire fictional series called the "Left Behind" series, detailing out an author's view of how the book of Revelations unfolds. 16 novels. And my impression after reading them is that the fictional author took far less liberties with what people literally saw in his novels than most commentators do writing their commentary on the book of Revelation.
I absolutely believe that God would have to accommodate freedom of will by rewarding those that do not accept Christ according to their heart and how they live justly. Humans have since Christ's death used Christianity as a license to sin, then ask forgiveness. By sheer logic, if there is a God, and He is what is written about Him, He has to be just and fair. I'm not sure if I can absolutely pinpoint this to specific scripture. But I will present a caveat. I am no longer a fundamentalist. So all of the "perfectly fits together never contradicts hand in a glove" BS doesn't fly with me.
Next, "working scriptures" or doing "word studies" or other types of activities like I did in the Way have taken on a different color. No longer am I trying to shoehorn 2 Greek words into a meaning that is 2 sizes too small, or comparing the Septuagint greek OT translation with the "Aramaiac" "Pedangta" texts and seeing how they match up when written from a completely opposite cultural point of view.
Anyway throwing that out there up front. I'll get to the detail too but it takes me a little longer with this outlook and approach.
Building on this, the first supporting section of scripture for this idea is Rev. 20:11-15. This section of scripture is known commonly as the "Great White Throne" judgement. So there are different judgments and times according to theologians.
It does seem that most commonly the "Great White Throne" judgment is for all, not just Christians - in direct reading, commentary, and interpretations written of those verses. Being for all, those who lived virtuously would be rewarded regardless of their beliefs.
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
GoldStar
Chockfull, I agree with you on this (except it's Revelation, not Revelations):
But I have to disagree with you on this:
It was John, not Paul...or George or Ringo....sorry, couldn't resist, just for Fun
damental reasons:
Rev 1:1 - "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:"
"Fun
damentalism hath its benefits, chiefly amongst them is accuracy of truth..." ~ author unknown
Edited by GoldStarLink to comment
Share on other sites
GoldStar
Wait, listen, what's that sound?
Antifundamentalism comin' 'round
gonna try to take the Fun
around
out of Fun-damentalism found
Edited by GoldStarLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Stop children what's that sound everybody knows what's goin down.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
typo on Paul - I was thinking John but fingers typed Paul.
Topically and sequentially, there actually were multiple revelations John recorded - I was describing them as a collection, not as the title of a book. This means that first word which I used in my sentence should not have been capitalized as the title of the book I included later accurately in the singular. That was my intent as the author of the sentence.
Please tell me you have more to say about the substance of my posts other than being a grammar Nazi.
Just sayin - couldn't resist LOL.
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Well, perhaps this won't mean much to some of you... but the combination of how our senses (conditioned from birth) mind works and the way scripture might be intentional written (at times or in certain places) makes is far too easy to miss or overlook... let's just say... "enough" of the truth, that there's undoubtedly a much larger "gray area" here than some might like or care for.
For instance... this whole issue of something being "literal" or not. If I write, "there's a fork in the road..." what do I mean, exactly? What literal fork in the road might you think of or imagine? A metal utensil of some sort... or the juncture of one road becoming two? Which of these do you say is more "literal," and why? What do you depend on to make that determination?
So... when it comes around to discussing/communicating spiritual realities, what definitions or "realities" are used to make the assessment whether something is figurative or literal? The commonly accepted practice seems to be to simply call something "figurative" whenever and where ever a perceived literal meaning doesn't make sense or fit with previously constructed (or accepted) theology, with insufficient thought ever more honestly given to what reality it might rather appropriately refer to "literally." And, if anyone thinks that there's nothing spiritual that can be spoken of or referred to in a "literal" sense... perhaps that's merely evidence of the carnal (sense knowledge) mind's failure to see and think in terms of deeper, otherwise invisible, perspectives on life.
Think the only 'literal' tree that grows or exists in this world is one that is constructed of cellulose? Then you are in no better shape than one wired to think the only "literal" fork in the road is a metal utensil. And that's just the physical side of this, with no thought or consideration being given to what it can or might refer to spiritually.
Edited by TLCa missing word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldStar
Ok, you got me back lol, glad we can have a little fun here
But did you mean literal grammar Nazi, or figurative grammar Nazi.
I do Nazi which one exactly you are referring to
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Anything that we read regardless of the subject or content. It is best to read enough content to understand the meaning. Here is a very positive section of Revelation chapter 22 as it relates to seeing and following Jesus Christ. And this sections ends with "they will reign for ever and ever". I have studied the Greek words here. Using a more literal translation "ever and ever" is "age and age".
From Thayer's Greek Lexicon this is #165, aioon. The definition is age, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity.
22 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
This section mentions "the throne of God and of the lamb". This is referring to Jesus Christ the savior of mankind. The first man from the dead to live eternally. Many scriptures symbolically refer to Jesus Christ as the lamb of God to mix a mindset from the Old Testament of the sacrifice of animals for the atonement of sin. Referring Jesus Christ as the lamb of God identifies Jesus Christ as "the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
sorry, but I can't follow any pattern of logic, reasoning or coherency in your post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
Rev. 22 appears to be a description of the eternal state that Mark S. has alluded to with the study of the Greek "ever & ever". The tree of life whether figurative or literal indicates a restored Eden that was lost in Genesis. The healing of the "nations" from the Greek indicates gentiles which brings to mind Isaiah 65 v.17-25. I no longer see the wolves , lions, & serpents described as literal, but symbolic of the Gentiles from an ancient Jewish perspective. In other words the Israelite's and the Gentiles will not be separated spiritually. Compare Romans 15 with Isaiah 11 & 65 and then Rev. 22.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
People use figurative or symbolic language sometimes. As an example, when someone says, "it is raining cats and dogs". Does that mean that the speaking person literally says that cats and dogs are coming down from the sky? If it does people like me would try to catch the dogs and Twinky would try to catch the cats so that they do not die. No, it is simply a means of communication that it is raining very hard. The book of Revelation also uses symbolic language.
I hope it is OK to say that there are some good posts on this thread. Does that mean I am now writing about a literal thread used for sewing? Or does it mean I am writing about good posts on this forum? And yes the writer of the book of Revelation also used symbolic language.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
I disagree, as I do not see this as a mere restoration of something which existed previously.
However, I'm not disallowing any possibility for a new Eden, if perceived as the condition of perfection. I just think that any new Garden of God and what He might choose to grow will be different than before.
Edited by TLCLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.