The Manchild Ministry 45 Minutes

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Bowas

You are right, When I used the word "siege," I was not referring to the actual attack, but from the time they saw Jerusalem surrounded by the gentiles, they fled, and were protected in the wilderness by God, as a hen protects her young.

Where are you getting this 3.5 year period when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies of gentiles? And when did it begin, and end?

It seems you added a word that seems to remove to whom it was written to to remove it from them, and that word you wrote is "originally." I say it was written to them and for them, even though we can learn from it, and certain aspects we can glean from, but it wasn't to us.

Added a word to what? And, since the Revelation was written "for" the seven churches in Asia Minor, how was the whole book beneficial to them? I'm not understanding what exactly your point is. Is the Revelation simply a neat history book, like the Aenead, or Livy's Histories, that we can "glean... certain aspects" from? What does that mean? And what bearing does that have on the discussion here?

I do believe Rev 12 was fulfilled in the first century, and is a depiction, using symbolic language, of the struggles, attacks and victory of the first century church.

Why? I mean, why do you believe that? Upon what basis?

The church, (the true Israel) fled Jerusalem and was protected for 3.5 years, while Jerusalem was ravaged and went through her destruction.

There's that 3.5 year "ravaging and destruction of Jerusalem" thing again. Where is this coming from? Jerusalem was besieged and "ravaged" for about 6 and a half months.

The "time frame" is pretty much limited to what is written, "shortly come to pass," "the time is at hand," and other such limiting declarations.

From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
(Mat 4:17)

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
(Mar 1:14-15)

Does this mean the kingdom was limited to the first century?

To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste. For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left.
(Deu 32:35-36)

Was this limited to the time shortly before, during, and perhaps immediately after the Conquest of Canaan? When did this come to pass?

Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.
(Joe 1:15)

To what does this refer? When did Joel prophesy, and when did the Day of the Lord come to pass, seeing as it was "at hand" in his day?

And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?
(Luk 18:7-8)

In the above passage, the word "speedily" is the same word translated "shortly" in Revelation. With that in mind, can you explain how on the one hand God is said to "bear long with them" yet at the same time He is said to "avenge them speedily/shortly"?

To remove it from to whom it was addressed, and to when it says it was for, we need clear proof, and not speculation, but we must take it and understand it as they did, the ones it was addressed to.

That is how I see it.

How did Christians in Asia Minor understand the Revelation? What was it's immediate significance to them? And, how would you know if you understood it the way they did?

Furthermore, if they did understand the Revelation the same way you do, is there any evidence of that? Are there any surviving writings from the early church - particularly from the area of Asia Minor - that would indicate they had the same understanding of the Apocalypse that you do? Is there any evidence that early Christians interpreted the Revelation as you do, that it strictly had application to first century Christians, especially those who had to deal with the destruction of Jerusalem?

(I am still not seeing exactly how relevant the destruction of Jerusalem was to Christians in Asia Minor, in the sense they needed to know about "fleeing into the wilderness for three and half years", especially considering the attack only lasted about 6 and a half months).