FMF & jaywill on Revelation

Originally posted by jaywill
That is what you got from John - Jesus.

John lived Jesus out.

If I assert that my admonishing of Revelation (in that other thread) was Jesus trying to set 'corporate christianity' straight, how and why would you reject this "testimony of Jesus"?

Originally posted by FMF
If I assert that my admonishing of Revelation (in that other thread) was Jesus trying to set 'corporate christianity' straight, how and why would you reject this "testimony of Jesus"?

==============================
If I assert that my admonishing of Revelation (in that other thread) was Jesus trying to set 'corporate christianity' straight, how and why would you reject this "testimony of Jesus"?
==================================

I don't think you know the book of Revelation at all well.

If you were really intent on seeing Christianity exposed you would embrace the book rather than try to discard it.

I can assure you that Revelation does a much better job at exposing degraded Christianity than you or I ever could.

But I have never been able much to show you how degraded Christianity is exposed and rebuked in the book because I have wasted too much time and energy debating your rational for discarding the book.

Now this term "corporate Christianity" I don't believe I recall you ever explaining. If you explained it, I never read it.

It sounds like you mean Christianity as a money making enterprize. Ironically, by discarding Revelation you discard the wisdom embodied within it that exposes the excesses of Christiandom of all sorts.

To put it another way, if I want to read strong warnings and rebukes of the failed Christianity I will go TO the book of Revelation rather than discard it.

Christ does not simply cast dispersions. He shows us an alternative and the way out. He doesn't just show us things wrong in a gloating condemning way. He opens the way to a healthier outcome.

"As many as I love I reprove and discipline; be zealous therefore and repent." (Rev. 3:19)

Is your rebuking of Christianity merely because you feel superior? Or is it out of love that brothers in Christ may repent and be healthy in a proper zeal for God ?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]==============================
If I assert that my admonishing of Revelation (in that other thread) was Jesus trying to set 'corporate christianity' straight, how and why would you reject this "testimony of Jesus"?
==================================

I don't think you know the book of Revelation at all well.

If you were really int ...[text shortened]... t of love that brothers in Christ may repent and be healthy in a proper zeal for God ?[/b]

Of course, ignoring my question is your prerogative.

Originally posted by FMF
Of course, ignoring my question is your prerogative.

Oh sorry. Did I not answer your question?

I think your attempt to discard the book of Revelation from the Bible are not of the Holy Spirit.

I do not think it is the work of Jesus in any regard.

In this regard I think you are deceived and misled.

Now my reasons for being so clear about this are in the book itself:

"I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this scroll.

And if anyone takes away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and out of the holy city, which is written in this scroll." (Rev. 22:18,19)

By attempting to exclude the book of Revelation from the Bible, I think you are taking away from the words of the scroll of the prophecy in whole.

I cannot trust such an attitude.

Originally posted by jaywill
Now my reasons for being so clear about [the book being the testimony of Jesus] are in the book itself...

And this is sufficient for you? A quote from the book itself, validating itself?

God sent Jesus down to Earth but left it to "John" to provide the words of the scroll of the prophecy in whole, decades later, when the corporate church needed it to be so?

Originally posted by FMF
And this is sufficient for you? A quote from the book itself, validating itself?

God sent Jesus down to Earth but left it to "John" to provide the words of the scroll of the prophecy in whole, decades later, when the corporate church needed it to be so?

====================
And this is sufficient for you? A quote from the book itself, validating itself?
=======================

It invalidated those who would take away from the words of the prophecy.

Such invalidation is not restricted to the book of Revelation though.

===========================
God sent Jesus down to Earth but left it to "John" to provide the words of the scroll of the prophecy in whole, decades later, when the corporate church needed it to be so?
===============================

Yes. But what do you mean by the corporte church ?

Are you suggesting that God sent Jesus to earth and left it to FMF to chop up the Bible, discarding things he doesn't like two millennia latter for the church ?

Originally posted by jaywill
Are you suggesting that God sent Jesus to earth and left it to FMF to chop up the Bible, discarding things he doesn't like two millennia latter for the church ?

Who did he leave it to to compile and to make decisions about discarding things they didn't like hundreds of years after Jesus passed away?

I think you are edging closer and closer to what 'corporate christianity' means.

Last go at the other thing. You still refuse to answer clearly:

A quote from the Book of Revelation itself, validating itself is sufficient for you?

"Jesus promised the kingdom and gave us the church"

The Chrictian message is for the individual, I don't believe Jesus ever intended that such a message to produce an institutionalised church.

I don't believe the 'church' need be anymore organised than a group of guys/girls meeting together in secret to chill out in the power of the spirit; in much the same way that junkies might meet together in shady flats now-a-days to shoot up; or in the same way that we might go to the pub and moan about politics - the list continues.

I certainly don't belive the Christian message is fit for the politicised church that emerged in 325 from the Council of Nicaea - that is, corporate christainity.

Originally posted by FMF
Who [b]did he leave it to to compile and to make decisions about discarding things they didn't like hundreds of years after Jesus passed away?

I think you are edging closer and closer to what 'corporate christianity' means.

Last go at the other thing. You still refuse to answer clearly:

A quote from the Book of Revelation itself, validating itself is sufficient for you?[/b]

================================
Who did he leave it to to compile and to make decisions about discarding things they didn't like hundreds of years after Jesus passed away?
====================================

I wrote before on this thread or another - the church fathers did not bestow authority upon the books of the New Testament. They discovered that authority. They did not complile and authoritative list. They listed the authoritative books.

Jesus promised that after His ascension that the Holy Spirit would guide the disciples into all the truth. So the concept of Jesus having "left" them to struggle on their own is in error.

"I am with you even unto the consummation of the age"

The Spirit of Christ guided the New Testament people of God to discern the inspired writings of the New Testament just as the Spirit of God guided the Jews to discern from all their documents, the Old Testament canon.

Yes there were disputes. Yes there was hesitations and indecisions. I believe that the Holy Spirit had the last word. The work of collecting, studying, deciminating, and discerning the precious from the common was done long ago.

========================
I think you are edging closer and closer to what 'corporate christianity' means.
=====================

I still have not understood exactly what you mean by "corporate christianity".

I do not consider myself as apart of any "anity". I am for Christ the Person. I am a member and constituent of His living Body the church.

==============================
Last go at the other thing. You still refuse to answer clearly:
============================

I am not evading anything here.

================================
A quote from the Book of Revelation itself, validating itself is sufficient for you?
================================

A quote from Revelation is not the only thing which convinces me that it is the word of God. It is a contributing thing.

The entire book, and not simply one quote, convinces me that it has the same life giving power and tone of authority that the other books of the Bible have.

I believe it is apostolic and written by one of the original apostles - John. And the hallmarks of inspiration are upon it. And I trust that the ancient church fathers who discerned its authority and included it among the 27 NT books were led by the Holy Spirit.

I think for example the Gospel of Peter does not belong on the same level of authority. Nor does the Gospel or of Thomas of Mary. And there are plenty of other spiritual writings, some of which may even be helpful, which nevertheless do not carry the apostolic authority of the New Testament 27 books.

I don't think it is necessary for me to read all these other apocraphal books and decide for myself. And I have not done that.

Originally posted by 3Samuel
"Jesus promised the kingdom and gave us the church"

The Chrictian message is for the individual, I don't believe Jesus ever intended that such a message to produce an institutionalised church.

I don't believe the 'church' need be anymore organised than a group of guys/girls meeting together in secret to chill out in the power of the spirit; in much the ...[text shortened]... church that emerged in 325 from the Council of Nicaea - that is, corporate christainity.

The apostle Paul gave one of many such warnings about apostasy and degradation among the disciples. We should expect that such would come to pass.

"Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among whom the Holy Spirit has placed you as overseers to shepherd the church of God which He obtained through His own blood.

I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. And among you yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after themselves." (Acts 20:28,29)

Though FMF has not defined what he means yet by "corporate christianity" I suppose he may mean precisely what Paul warned about.

So men even from the disciples would arise and speak perverse things, unscriptural things, things of the flesh of greed and of political power, drawing away disciples after themselves. We were warned. And I am not here to defend degraded Christianity.

Regardless of these forewarned apostasies Christ said that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.

A warning arises in me when I see someone propose that a book of the New Testament is to be blamed for apostasy and should be discarded from the Holy Bible.

I regard this thought as one of the perverse things spoken by wolves coming in to scatter the sheep.

Originally posted by 3Samuel
"Jesus promised the kingdom and gave us the church"

The Chrictian message is for the individual, I don't believe Jesus ever intended that such a message to produce an institutionalised church.

I don't believe the 'church' need be anymore organised than a group of guys/girls meeting together in secret to chill out in the power of the spirit; in much the ...[text shortened]... church that emerged in 325 from the Council of Nicaea - that is, corporate christainity.

=========================
I certainly don't belive the Christian message is fit for the politicised church that emerged in 325 from the Council of Nicaea - that is, corporate christainity.
===================================

I understand that the letters to the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3 are also a prophesy of the development of the church through the centries.

We have not been able to get into any of that. But in those seven prophetic letters the various stages of the Christian church are told in typological and symbolic language.

The seven churches in Asia are therefore an outline of the major states of health and unhealth that the church on earth passed through. Everything is there. It is fascinating.

I highly recommend the book by Watchman Nee entitltesd The Orthodoxy of the Church which is a brilliant exposition of Revelation chapters 2 and 3.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?r=1&ISBN=9780870830075&ourl=Orthodoxy%2Dof%2Dthe%2DChurch%2FWatchman%2DNee

The biggest problem with Revelation has to do with the willingness of too many to put credence into its 'prophecies'.

Symbolic language allows far too much latitude in the interpreter's summation of what it's supposed to mean. Also, just as in the writings of Nostradamus, we have prediction and prophesy that are being applied after the fact, not beforehand.

Never mind entire passages that are entirely ignored because they don't fit the reader's perspective of what is actually being prophesied.

I maintain that Revelations was written to an audience that was desperate and despondent following the crush of the Jewish rebellion and destruction of the temple. It is written to their specific agony and fear of annihilation. It is not written to us - at all.

The message of Revelation is similar to the story of Pandora's Box. What was in the bottom of Pandora's Box after all the evils had been loosened? Hope. So it is with Revelations. Revelations resonates with hope in the end, despite the apocalyptic language and events. It is saying that despite the despair of the Jews in the first and second centuries, despite the persecution, despite the destruction of what Jews and the early Christians hold most sacred, in spite of the martyrdom - there is hope.

That is the only essential message of Revelations.

Originally posted by Badwater
The biggest problem with Revelation has to do with the willingness of too many to put credence into its 'prophecies'.

Symbolic language allows far too much latitude in the interpreter's summation of what it's supposed to mean. Also, just as in the writings of Nostradamus, we have prediction and prophesy that are being applied after the fact, not beforeha of the martyrdom - there is hope.

That is the only essential message of Revelations.

Reveation is written to all who are on the earth before the Second Coming of Christ. Why do you think that such a narrow audience was intended ?

This book is just as much for readers today in 2009 AD as is ever was.

"Behold, He comes with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the land will mourn over Him. Yes, amen." (Rev. 1:7)

The audience of this book is to all those on this side of Jesus coming on the clouds of heaven to set foot upon the earth.

"He who testifies these things says, Yes, I come quickly. Amen. Come, Lord Jesus ! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen." (22:21)

The entire age of grace holds the audience to Revelation. That is the entire church age - the totality of the age of the preaching of the Gospel of Grace. The entire age before Christ's descent to this earth furnishes the audience of this book.

Originally posted by jaywill
Reveation is written to all who are on the earth before the Second Coming of Christ. Why do you think that such a narrow audience was intended ?

This book is just as much for readers today in 2009 AD as is ever was.

No, it's not, and I explained why. Kind of you to completely ignore what I said but I suppose that does suit your viewpoint.

Originally posted by Badwater
No, it's not, and I explained why. Kind of you to completely ignore what I said but I suppose that does suit your viewpoint.

==============================
No, it's not, and I explained why. Kind of you to completely ignore what I said but I suppose that does suit your viewpoint.
======================================

I have to disagree with you. Your reasons are not good.

The book of Revelation is just as much for the audience today as any other book in the Bible.

Seven times in chapter 2 and 3 we read "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

Now if you choose to ignore the book, that is on you. Your desire to ignore it has no effect on it being written to those who have an ear to hear what the Spirit says.