Revelation

Dave Lucas said:
Revelation was a book that was originally not going to be made part of the canon.

Irenaeus did not want it included as he felt it was not for the laity. The New Testament is only one quarter of all the texts that early Christians had available. And many felt all the texts were inspired, but church fathers decided otherwise.

It is because of this noninclusive nature that we are missing pieces that would help illuminate more clearly the passages of Revelation. It is also helpful that all things in scripture were written contextually. Pulling stray lines out will not give you what you need to know to understand. This was the big issue the King had with the teachers in the temple.

It is still an issue today.
Click to expand...
So you are saying God isn't able to keep His word the way He wanted it? Yes other manuscripts were found, but God has the power and is able to keep His word the way He wanted it.
 
CeileDe said:
So you are saying God isn't able to keep His word the way He wanted it? Yes other manuscripts were found, but God has the power and is able to keep His word the way He wanted it.
Click to expand...

Yes, these other texts are PART of The Word. Without their use we get an incomplete understanding. Hence why Revelation
is one of the least understood parts of canon.

The whole of scripture is needed to gain a contextual awareness of what is meant. You cannot cherry pick and know what is really going on.
 
Abdicate said:
It is an assumption that John of Revelation is John the apostle because of what Jesus said:

Luke 9:27 (KJV)
But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

Tradition says everyone died a martyr's death except John the Apostle. The fact is we don't know for sure as "John" was as common a name then as it is now. One thing is certain, it was John the Baptist, because he was only six months older than Jesus, was born around 7 or 8 BC which would have put him over 103 years old when Revelation was penned IF he hadn't lost his head to Herod!

Luke 9:9 (KJV)
And Herod said, John have I beheaded: but who is this, of whom I hear such things? And he desired to see him.

This Herod was "Antipas", the son of Herod the Great (the baby killer) and Malthace. I hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't see how John the Baptist could have wrote it.

Just the fact that it was written so late, if that's the right year, makes it out of the lifetime of people that knew Jesus or his followers. As far as I can tell the life expectancy had already dropped dramatically so I can't imagine living 100 years was the norm.
 
Dave Lucas said:
Yes, these other texts are PART of The Word. Without their use we get an incomplete understanding. Hence why Revelation
is one of the least understood parts of canon.

The whole of scripture is needed to gain a contextual awareness of what is meant. You cannot cherry pick and know what is really going on.
Click to expand...
Like I said, God would keep His word together and that is what we have today.
 
Dave Lucas said:
Yes, these other texts are PART of The Word. Without their use we get an incomplete understanding. Hence why Revelation
is one of the least understood parts of canon.

The whole of scripture is needed to gain a contextual awareness of what is meant. You cannot cherry pick and know what is really going on.
Click to expand...

Revelation is only deemed to be least understood because it takes the revelation of Holy Spirit for the truths therein to be illuminated. It is a book of prophecy.
 
CeileDe said:
Like I said, God would keep His word together and that is what we have today.
Click to expand...

Yes that is why he revealed to us the missing texts that man tried to rid us of.

It is also why we still have can use the Apocrypha, even though many men say it is NOT inspired.

But few have read either. So they go by an incomplete understanding.
 
Euphemia said:
The canon is complete---nothing missing, nothing lost.
Click to expand...
For Protestants the Apocrypha is missing.

For all, until they were found, the Dead Sea Scrolls were missing.

For many on both sides of the schism, these are considered not inspired words of God.

So it is the men, making the choices what is or is not. And it is The King trying to provide more to the canon. And it being ignored.

So what is really going on?

Think hard. Schism (division of house) and then banning of scripture. What does that sound like?
 
Dave Lucas said:
Yes that is why he revealed to us the missing texts that man tried to rid us of.

It is also why we still have can use the Apocrypha, even though many men say it is NOT inspired.

But few have read either. So they go by an incomplete understanding.
Click to expand...
I trust the Holy Spirit when I need clarification. I'm not saying I haven't read other books that you are referring to, I just don't believe they are What God had planned for His word to us
 
CeileDe said:
I trust the Holy Spirit when I need clarification. I'm not saying I haven't read other books that you are referring to, I just don't believe they are What God had planned for His word to us
Click to expand...

Is that YOU not believing or the Holy Spirit leading you to that?

2 Timothy 3 comes to mind.
 
Dave Lucas said:
So the Holy Spirit said that "these" texts are not needed?
Click to expand...
The Holy Spirit has never lead me to look anywhere else besides what I have now in my Bible. I have out of curiosity, because I like history, read other books that you claim should be in the Bible.
 
Dave Lucas said:
For Protestants the Apocrypha is missing.

For all, until they were found, the Dead Sea Scrolls were missing.

For many on both sides of the schism, these are considered not inspired words of God.

So it is the men, making the choices what is or is not. And it is The King trying to provide more to the canon. And it being ignored.

So what is really going on?

Think hard. Schism (division of house) and then banning of scripture. What does that sound like?
Click to expand...

The Apocrypha is not inspired writing.

God has ordained and anointed the coming forth of His written word---perfect and intact, nothing missing or wanting. He has done a mighty work, for which no one but Him deserves praise and glory.
 
Euphemia said:
The Apocrypha is not inspired writing.

God has ordained and anointed the coming forth of His written word---perfect and intact, nothing missing or wanting. He has done a mighty work, for which no one but Him deserves praise and glory.
Click to expand...

Then why did Irenaeus settle only upon the four gospels when there were more?
Also to include only the letters of Paul and leave out Revelation until men begged him to include it?

Why also do protestants remove the Apocrypha when catholics do not?

Why did the dead sea scrolls come back after all that time when early Christians knew of them?

Is Timothy's testimony not valid when he said ALL scripture is good?

Were not the misinterpretations and relying solely on the tradition of scripture that the teachers and rabbis taught corrected by Jesus?

Is it not possible that men have purposefully did these things to gain control of the Church for their own purposes?
 
CeileDe said:
The Holy Spirit has never lead me to look anywhere else besides what I have now in my Bible. I have out of curiosity, because I like history, read other books that you claim should be in the Bible.
Click to expand...

Question then, do these texts break any of the commands of The King?
 
Dave Lucas said:
Yes, these other texts are PART of The Word. Without their use we get an incomplete understanding. Hence why Revelation is one of the least understood parts of canon.

The whole of scripture is needed to gain a contextual awareness of what is meant. You cannot cherry pick and know what is really going on.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I have to disagree with what you have said here, when I was born again, back in the '80s the Revelation was a closed book to the Church, with only a couple of commentaries deemed acceptable penned by Barnhouse and Ironside, however, Daniel tells us at the end knowledge will increase, and the Revelation has been opened to us by the Holy Spirit to much greater insight than these two men of God had.

For instance, with all of the different perceptions floating around the Church and even on this board, the key to the Revelation was revealed to the Church by the Holy Spirit in the '90s, that it is written in chronological order, Rev 1:19 and that we are presently in Chapters 2 & 3, with four of the seven Churches on the planet today, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicean.

That is just one of many wonderful Truths the Spirit has revealed to the Church, but since it is a relatively new Book to us, so to speak, if we come with preconceived notions taught to us by men when the Revelation was still sealed, then the false teaching we have received (in ignorance) from men, will cause us to resist the teaching of the Holy Spirit today just like Stephen said the leaders did back in Acts as to the revelation of Jesus as their Messiah.

If we approach the Revelation as a new Book and allow the Holy Spirit to teach us all things, like Jesus said, then we will be able to know and understand it.

Blessings,

Gene
 
JustPassingThru said:
I'm afraid I have to disagree with what you have said here, when I was born again, back in the '80s the Revelation was a closed book to the Church, with only a couple of commentaries deemed acceptable penned by Barnhouse and Ironside, however, Daniel tells us at the end knowledge will increase, and the Revelation has been opened to us by the Holy Spirit to much greater insight than these two men of God had.

For instance, with all of the different perceptions floating around the Church and even on this board, the key to the Revelation was revealed to the Church by the Holy Spirit in the '90s, that it is written in chronological order, Rev 1:19 and that we are presently in Chapters 2 & 3, with four of the seven Churches on the planet today, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicean.

That is just one of many wonderful Truths the Spirit has revealed to the Church, but since it is a relatively new Book to us, so to speak, if we come with preconceived notions taught to us by men when the Revelation was still sealed, then the false teaching we have received (in ignorance) from men, will cause us to resist the teaching of the Holy Spirit today just like Stephen said the leaders did back in Acts as to the revelation of Jesus as their Messiah.

If we approach the Revelation as a new Book and allow the Holy Spirit to teach us all things, like Jesus said, then we will be able to know and understand it.

Blessings,

Gene
Click to expand...
Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicean, what are these churches?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top