Revelation 14:3 Who sings the new song???????

by label licker 50 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Larsinger58

  AGuest: Thanks for your comments.

  Actually, I'm very aware that "Jews" became a common reference to all Israelites by the 1st Century because not just those from Judah and Benjamin associated themselves with the "Jews." bUT I'm careful to say "Israel" in reference to the nation, especially pre-exilic times. For instance, I will always say "when the Israelites left Egypt" in connection with the Exodus because of this. So indeed, I consider the 144,000 a reference to the 12 tribes of Israel, not just the Jews. So we are on the same page for that one!

  Thanks for your comment/notice.

  But as far as not knowing how many are in the kingdom, since the "root" is considered the holy stump, which is Jewish, and the gentiles are grafted in the tree where the natural Jews were lopped off, I'd have you consider Isa 6:13 where the root, the stump left remaining is considered 1/10th of the entire tree:

  ISA 6:. 13 And there will still be in it a tenth, and it must again become something for burning down, like a big tree and like a massive tree in which, when there is a cutting down [of them], there is a stump; a holy seed will be the stump of it.”

  So, not withstanding this could be representative, if indeed the stump is the 144,000 and is proportionally 1/10th of the entire tree, then the entire number would be 1,440,000, with 1,296,000 being gentiles.

  I reject that the number is unlimited since these are king-priests and would be a lesser number than those who survive Armageddon, which I consider to be a large, unlimited number and the reference to those surviving Armageddon and that is, coming out of the great tribulation.

  Thanks, again for your reflections!
• 

  Bobcat

  I posted some material about this subject (24 elders) from the Baker Exegetical Commentary on Revelation on this thread. See post #526.

  Incidentally, does anyone know how to post a link and have the link scroll down automatically to the point you want? Or is that doable here? (I'm referring to a link from another thread here such as the link in this post.)
• 

  AGuest

  Thank you, dear Lars (again, peace to you!). The thing is that those of the other 10 tribes who worshipped WITH the Jews in Jerusalem (indeed, the priests were of Levi; however, the lion's share of Levi went with the 10-tribe kingdom), identified themselves as "Jews," yes. But that does not take into account those of the 10 that did NOT. The Jews, then only recognized those of Israel who worshipped with them... shunning those who did not (John 4:9, 19). That is because the Law "fenced off" those who did NOT worship as they did, according to the Law Covenant.

  Regarding your numbers, I recall we discussed this before. Then, I shared with you that even if the 144,000 only represent a 10th, it is a tenth as to ISRAEL and not a 10th as to the great crowd. We are actually GIVEN the number of the first; however, no man... not even your dear self... is able to number the latter. Why? Because the "full number" of that group is not set BY a number; it is set by TIME. The number is determined, then, by how many of that group are actually ON the Ark (of the Covenant)... when the "Door" (that is Christ)... is closed by God (John 6:44).

  Since my Lord, the Son (you?)... who is that Door... doesn't even know the day and hour of his own return... and the START of the gathering of gathering of that group, he wouldn't know the number of its end, either. Else... he would have told his early day followers. As he told them many, many other things.

  Greetings, dear BC and again, peace to you! I did read your comments... and commented in response.

  Peace to you, both!

  YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  Band on the Run

  I don't see how Revelation can be interpreted without a deep knowledge of Judaism, Christianity, and the culture of Rome. Only a couple of weeks ago, I posted that Elaine Pagels, my prof. at Columbia, published a popular book on the interpretation of Revelation. As a JW, I had no real exposure to ancient Rome and Jewish belief at the time. Revelation scared the wits out of me.

  With a scant knowledg of all these cultures, it is clear that Revelation was written by John of Patmos to encourage Christians of his day. It is clear that the early Christians were troubled by the delay of Christ's return. There was never widespread persecution as many Christian churches teach. It was episodic and regional. I wrote a paper on the martyrdoms. Revelation barely made it into the Bible.

  When you understand the history and the genre of acopalytic literature, Revelation makes much more sense. Looking for the meaning of every single symbols detracts from the overall hope and consolation that John offers.

  I am certain that the Emperors Domition and Nero were utterly terrifying in their day. Countless centuries later, my eyes pop reading Roman histories of their deeds. Hitler and Stalin were scary.

  I have yet to read the second main point of Pagel's book. Evidently there is evidence that John of Patmos was a Jewish Christian who opposed the Pauline influence.

  For Jesus to be just and fair, all humans should have equal access to the meaning of scripture. People cannot reference any specific interpretation b/c it was not meant for our present day. John could have written a simple statement. If xx and yy were meant to be Bablyon the Great or lamps or whatever, John could simply have written I saw four hoursemen, they were some modern country yet to exist, the United States, located principally in New York and Geneva, the Trilaterial Commission or anything.

  This outlook is not news. It is well supported and as new evidence emerges, this view is bolstered. How can any of us know exactly what John of Patmos intended when he wrote any specific detail? The only person who could answer that was John of Patmos, who died more than thousand years ago. Christ still has not come. I hope He does.

  It seems to me that Revelation, of all Bible books, is a rorschach test. Our pat answers reveal far more about ourselves than John's meaning.
• 

  AGuest

  For Jesus to be just and fair, all humans should have equal access to the meaning of scripture.

  All humans DO have equal access to the meaning of the scriptures. The same way his first disciples did: through HIM (Luke 24:27, 32, 44, 45). Unfortunately, not all humans take advantage of knowing HIM (Luke 24:31, 35; John 6:50, 51, 56; 15:4, 5; Proverbs 4:7; 8:1-36). Not HIS fault (Isaiah 29:14-16)... and certainly not the fault of those who HAVE taken such advantage... that others haven't and so don't have such access (John 10:7, 9). It's their own fault, including their failure to LISTEN (Isaiah 59:1, 2; 58:1-14; Daniel 12:10; John 10:1-5, 8, 27). Doesn't HAVE to be that way for them, though (Matthew 7:7-11; 17:5; John 7:37, 38).

  People cannot reference any specific interpretation b/c it was not meant for our present day.

  Says someone who says no one can know... indeed, that they don't know... but apparently knows.

  John could have written a simple statement.

  No, he couldn't have. He was limited to writing what he was TOLD to write: what he had seen, was seeing, and would see. Nothing less, nothing more (Revelation 1:11, 19; 22:18, 19). He did write that there would be ones who would HEAR the words of the prophecy and observe the things written in it. Indeed, it was for such ones that he was GIVEN the visions (Revelation 1:3). Even so, in hearing such ones would not be relying on their OWN understanding, but on the understanding they received from God, through Christ (Job 32:8; Genesis 40:8; Psalm 147:5; Proverbs 1:5, 6; 8:4-11; 9:10; 28:5; 2 Peter 1:20-2:2)

  If xx and yy were meant to be Bablyon the Great or lamps or whatever, John could simply have written I saw four hoursemen, they were some modern country yet to exist, the United States, located principally in New York and Geneva, the Trilaterial Commission or anything.

  Yet, he didn't... and you're chagrined about that because YOU don't know what he meant. Had you simply ASKED, however... in faith... of the One who would have TOLD you... YOU would know what the horsemen represent... and WHEN... as well as the other visions. You can't ask someone, though, who you refuse to believe/admit exists. So, proceed on your own understanding. See how far that gets you. No farther than the speculations of man that you are already "eating."

  A doulos of Christ,

  SA
• 

  Band on the Run

  Shelby,

  We will never convince the other. If you had no higher education, I could understand your views. It is amazing to me that anyone who studied at college and law school (law school even more so than college b/c of the Socratic method and empahsis on textual correctness) could believe a variatoin of WT teaching. It puzzles me.

  The more I have learned the more I have learned what I do not know. Anyone can make up anything. This is true about the Bible, in general, and 1,000 times more so for Revelation.

  I don't understand the continued attraction to GB type thinking. It is beyond my comprhension. Some people can fragment their lives. I guess that absolute certainty is very comforting.

  My parents were very interest whenever some group broke away from the Witnesses. They would seek out certain people and ask for details. I wonder if they would have made a leap if a group was available. It may no tbe true but they were told that the new group was just like the WT, only making up their own interpretations, the respnse was always "oh," and "may as well stay home where we know people."

  This is a psychological/cultural difference more than objective statement of faith.

  You cannot prove that your Christ is genuine. I cannot. In fact, I tell friends that my faith works for me. Everyone has a different path. History and culture is important to me precisely b/c of the Witnesses. KNowledge does not negate faith in Christ. It is apples and oranges. Rick Santorum's statement to the contrary was proven wrong.
• 

  AGuest

  That you think I am TRYING to prove anything is why there is SUCH a vast chasm between us. Unlike you... I have nothing TO prove. I am not SEEKING approval, acceptance, regard, or popularity from/among man. You are SO ensconced in that which you are used to... those seeking honor and glory for themselves... that you cannot FATHOM that that is NOT why I post what I do. In spite of how many times I have shared why with you: love... for the Truth... love OF truth... and love for those he, the Truth, loves. Really. That's it, that's all. Now, I understand that that doesn't make sense to YOU... because of how all others who make similar claims "are." What can I tell you: believe me? Nope. I can only tell you to ask. Now, if you can't bring yourself to do that... can't find a way... that's on you, girlfriend. Not me.

  A doulos of Christ,

  SA
• 

  nibbled

  Lars you mentioned that Moses and the root or stump were Jewish. They weren't, all the patriarchs in fact were all Hebrew, and neither Israelites nor Jews. The root which branches are grafted from and to is not Israel nor Judah but the roots of faith in the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Also "Gentiles" is a rendering for "goyim" which is Jewish. The Jews use it today as a derogatory term for anyone not Jewish. The NWT renders it "people of the nations". However it's rendered it was also used to describe Israel by the Jews who considered them apostate in their worship, and of the nations as they weren't of their nation, Judah.

  More are the children of the barren woman, Jerusalem above our mother, than she who is married. The great crowd above numbers "unlimited" regardless of those who live through Armageddon on earth. She who is married speaks only to Jerusalem below, not all mankind.

  AGuest, looks like we've come into the same "all truth".

  Band on the Run, I'd be interested to learn more of your perspective, especially once you've read a few more authors than just the one professor, or dug into the scriptures a bit deeper. (Or just heart to heart discussion is my favorite—learn together?) I agree with your statement regarding needing the context to even begin to understand. Consider this for me... What if there were the old covenant, the good news of the kingdom, the king rejected, the pause button on that movie for the interval for the great sacred secret revealed to and by Paul before picking up again after the fullness of the nations had come in? The letters to the Hebrews are comfort (Kingdom Epistles). Revelation is the end story after the veil is lifted off Israel.

  I also heard John didn't believe in Jesus when he lived. Why does your prof believe Revelation is against Paul? Does she recognize its writer as inspired as the scribe for Christ's sole book as the Word of God in the word of God?
• 

  Band on the Run

  Oh, what can one do. I must do further research an dig deeper yet anyone can post any crap that comes into their minds. First, I have spent countless hours reading Revelation itself. I did so for the first time in college and after law school, where the training in textual emphasis certainly helped me. Over the decades, I have read about seven books on Revelation itself and have read many, many such discussions of Revelation in general Bible/New Testament books. In addition, within mainstream faith traditions, such a view is heartily accepted.

  With the exception of a few lofty verses in Revelation, mainstream religions stay out of Revelation. They include the book but I could number on one hand the sermons that even referenced Revelation. It is not a very useful book. Throughout history maniacs, deluded fools, and some sincere theologicans have invented meanings.

  Without citing a specific reference to any particular post, every generations has had members that claim Revelation is happening now. During the Borgia papacies, opponents viewed the popes through the lens of Revelation. As empires come and go, each empire or one's own state has been a focal point for dissidents.

  A higher criticism view of Revelation can increase faith. When the mystery is diminished, Revelation has univeral meaning to Christians. John of Patmos did not write a jig saw puzzle. After my research and discussing my fear of the book with religious leaders, I believe it has a place in the canon. It should have disclaimers, though.

  Critical thinking can be applied to scripture. I would bet a large sum that I have read Revelation more carefully and more carefully than you have.

  Besides, to be assert that "666" mean this specific item or "the Great Beast" means something else is to go beyond what is written. Christ never said he would select one messenger. Paul always emphasized the communality of the Church. I can provide academic references and quote from text,
• 

  nibbled

  Band on the Run,

  Oh dear! I'm so sorry Band on the Run, I was complimenting you! I only meant as much as to note that there's a difference in formulating a personal thesis, and being prepared to share one, and since you mentioned all the references, as well as not having gotten yet to Elaine's "second point" I was eager to hear your thoughts once you were to that point!

  I wouldn't want to compare hours or books read, I recognize some students never study and yet pass through courses with top marks, while others put long and hard hours into applying themselves to the material to achieve the same. Not that this compares you and I, I wouldn't even know nor dare! :)

  I would offer that I share similar passion. I've never had a fear of the book, but then again I was raised with the WT's Revelation book making everything bad about everyone else. I'm passionate about the book because one day I a strong desire to know the Christ more personally. I pray "through" him, and only knew of him from the "good news" books written about his life of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. At a loss as to what I thought I could do to become more personally acquainted with him, it suddenly dawned on me—Revelation. It's his book, his only book. His personal book. It's the Word of God in the word of God.

  I considered his book like movie, and tried to let scenes play out in my mind as I read, understanding he's telling a story, and we're the ones who've jumbled it up. I took the whole text and put it into one removing the chapter breaks to read it as it would have been written (I think I left in the verse markers, I can't recall, I'd have to go back and look). I did not go back to read the Revelation Book from the WT again, because I recognized that Matthew 24 parallels the four horsemen, yet vividly recall the rider on the white horse being depicted as Christ, while Matthew 24 if an indeed parallel of the events of the four horsemen, portrays the looks-like-Christ guy as the false Christ's who go out and conquer well meaning Christians seeking His return. (That and many other things—like my mind gets into an angry heap when I look at their trumpets explanation which isn't even in the proper order of events!)

  I have read papers written by historical theologians, and I understand the events of Rome in the first century, and the affect of the book on the congregation.

  Here's where I wonder about talking to you personally about your personal thoughts. I don't mean to compete. I am a member of another forum where it's all about academic smack-down and frankly that's why I'm here. I needed a break from whose brain more stuffed. I care a lot about people—I'm motivated by love, and want to know what people, especially discerning people think. You seem to be just that sort! I wanted to hear more and talk to you, specifically!

  Since you've been decades doing stuff, you probably have age on me. I'm only 'decades' old, three score and three times and a season.

  Since it seems we're both passionate about the book of Revelation, I hope that you'll accept my apology. I didn't mean to start your morning out with an offense! When you drink your next cup of Joe, I hope you'll think of that warm and brightening feeling in association with me. :)

  I've got to get dressed and go catch my shuttle to work, but I'll be looking back as soon as I get online hoping to see your response, or to continue now to share my thoughts, my reply to what you said. I also feel like I didn't respond to the original question asked last night so much as offer points to others posts. Its hard to navigate the site via only iPhone!