Rev. 14.4

by is there help out there 31 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Cold Steel

  This is where the Jehovah's Witnesses really fall down on their theology. According to their own eschatological views, there are two resurrections. The "heavenly class" are resurrected as spirits, while the "earthly class" are resurrected as physical beings, like Adam and Eve were before the Fall. Forget that there's no indication of this in scripture or tradition at all. That's the way it is.

  Anciently, the holy ones taken into temple service were all "virgins" in the sense that they were temporarily celibate. In a metaphorical sense, the 144,000 are virgins in the sense that they will be free from the influences of the world. While the Antichrist will have the mark of the Beast on their foreheads, the 144,000 will have the mark of the Father in their foreheads.

  Rather than argue what the 144,000 are, it's easy enough to determine what they are not, and it's clear that some deliberate monkeying around with the scriptural exegesis has been done by the Watchtower crowd.

  All resurrections will be as Christ's resurrection. That means a physical resurrection of flesh and bone (not blood). The Watchtower theologians, when pressed, will ask that one disprove their interpretations when, in reality, it is they who must prove theirs. Much has beeen written about the 144,000 and their roles in the last days, but we know from scripture that through Christ, all men, good and evil, will be resurrected. Not as spirits, but as physical beings.
• 

  jonathan dough

  The Jehovah’s Witnesses also refer to Christ’s resurrecting of Lazarus as a demonstration of “what resurrection will mean for mankind in general” (Insight, 785; Reasoning, 336-337), implying they will be corrupt flesh on earth. But if that is the case the 144,000 would not go to heaven at all. Lazarus, as a first century Christian was one of the anointed 144,000 and their resurrection, according to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, is invisible to the human eye (Insight, 787). So it couldn’t be an example of the generally resurrected corrupt body, and if it was it disproves their “invisible 1918 first resurrection of the 144,000” theory (Reasoning, 336-337). And if Lazarus was not one of the anointed it proves wrong their theory that all first century Christians were of the anointed class of 144,000. Which only leaves open the possibility that Lazarus, resurrected Lazarus, quit following Christ, but that seems unlikely.

  Jesus didn't say that he resurrected Lazarus to show what resurrection meant for mankind in general. He did it for love, because he had pity. He resurrected his friend "...so that the Son of God may be glorified through it," (John 11:4) and "so that (they) may believe" (John 11:15).

  http://144000.110mb.com/144000/i-6.html
• 

  jonathan dough

  How about the JW argument that someone must rule or reign over the earth? Rev 20:1-6
• 

  jonathan dough
• 

  Cold Steel

  I love the "invisible" thing. It's so hard to prove wrong.

  It's like the "fastest gun in the West" thing.

  Wanna see it again?
• 

  AnnOMaly

  How about the JW argument that someone must rule or reign over the earth? Rev 20:1-6

  Rev. 20 is a theological minefield. Whatever view of the Millennium one has, there's always SOMETHING in Rev. 20 that doesn't fit.

  Regarding the idea that kings have to have someone to rule over, for me there are two possibilities that kinda fit with the NT teaching where we don't have two classes of Christian:

  Christians from the gospel/church age will rule over the resurrected 'unrighteous,'

  or

  Everyone's a 'king' under the King, Jesus. It would be a great equalizer if everyone had the same status and shares equally in the blessings.

  Yep, both possibilities have their problems. The 'priests' thing was easier for me to resolve.
• 

  designs

  Equality at last (everyone's a king). Where were the Cliff's notes when you needed them.

  Revelation appeals to the fantasy portion of our minds.

  Why do some insist the 144,00 are symbolic but the lake of fire is literal.

  Why does this list of tribes not match any other of the some 20 combinations of tribes of Jews.

  Some denominations teach the 144,000 are literal virgin Jews, to others they represent the true faithful Christians, to still others they represent Jewish Christians over Gentile Christians.

  Be good, do good, look for ways to help others everyday.

  All will be well- Shekinah
• 

  Narkissos

  This is perhaps the major narrative gap in the extant text of Revelation (strongly suggesting the conflation of different source texts): at the end of chapter 19 nobody seems to be left alive and yet in chapter 20 there are nations around (v. 3,8). On the one hand, this is somewhat consistent with the structural organisation of the previous visions which gives the impressions that the end is always delayed: the seventh seal opens on the seven trumpets, the seventh trumpet on the seven plagues, the seventh plague on Babylon's judgement; but here the slaughter of 19:11-21 doesn't seem to spare anyone and the transition is not so smooth. Unless perhaps the redactor understood it as limited to the Roman empire (the Beast, cf. chapter 13) and not the outside (barbarian) nations (which the description of 20:8, "the nations at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog" could suit). Otoh, the scenario of chapter 20 consistently places the general resurrection after the millenium and the last war (20:7-10, which may have been originally a doublet of 19:11-21 but now looks like a later stage) -- the only resurrected people during the millenium are those who reign with Christ (first resurrection).
• 

  Leolaia

  Narkissos...We had a discussion about this issue a few years ago. The interesting thing I pointed out is that the bulk of Revelation (particularly ch. 11-19) is a reworking of Daniel in light of recent speculation about Nero redivivus, with the scheme of ch. 7-12 of Daniel setting in motion the tyrranical reign of the Beast → great tribulation → destruction of the Beast → resurrection plot of Revelation. Notice here that the resurrection follows the divine war that brings the Beast's rule to an end. But most of the material in ch. 20-22 is not Danielic but drawn from Ezekiel and follows the plot of ch. 37-47 of Ezekiel. Here we (1) start with the resurrection (Ezekiel 37:10; Revelation 20:5), then (2) there is a restored kingdom for a duration of time (Ezekiel 37:21; Revelation 20:4), then (3) Gog of Magog battle the holy ones in Jerusalem (Ezekiel 38:2; Revelation 20:8), then (4) the prophet is taken up to a high mountain (Ezekiel 40:2; Revelation 21:10), and (5) sees the New Jerusalem with the river of life and healing leaves (Ezekiel 47:12; Revelation 22:2). So here the eschatological war follows the resurrection. Meanwhile there is still some Danielic material in ch. 20 that has been awkwardly interwoven with this, such as the opening of books for judgment and the second resurrection (20:12). I recall that if the Danielic and Ezekielic material are untwined and assigned to separate oracles, the contradictions in ch. 19-20 disappear. So my working hypothesis is that the original Danielic scenario in the first version was reworked with a seperate Ezekielic oracle that presently ends the book (as the material in ch. 21-22 of the second edition parallels the secondary material in ch. 1-3).
• 

  Narkissos

  That's an interesting point, although it raises the question of how much interweaving of Daniel and Ezekiel traditions already occurred upstream of the extant Revelation, both in its immediate "sources" and its own redactional stages of composition, before the insertion within the final "envelope" (introduction / conclusion). There are quite a lot of "Ezekielic" reminiscences in 11--19 as well (11:1ff // Ez 40:3,5; 11:8 // Ez 11:6; 16:46ff; 11:11 // Ez 37:5,10; 11:13 // Ez 38:19f; 12:3 // Ez 29:3; 12:14 // Ez 17:3,7; 14:8ff // Ez 23:32ff; 14:10 // Ez 38:22; 15:8 // Ez 44:4; 16:1 // Ez 14:19; 23:31; 17 // Ez 16:15ff; 17:4 // Ez 28:13; 17:16 // Ez 16:39ff; 23:29; 26:19; 18:1 // Ez 43:2; 18:3 // Ez 27:12,18,33; 18:9// Ez 26:16f; 27:30ff; 18:11 // Ez 27:36; 18:12ff // Ez 27:12-24; 18:15 // Ez 27:31; 18:17f // Ez 27:27ff; 19:17 // Ez 39:4,17-20).

  Anyway my last comment was rather from the perspective of the latest redactor (which happens to be also the reader's). To him the extant sequence of "events" (including the two "final" wars) must have made some narrative sense, regardless of where they ultimately came from. Imo there are good reasons to think that his "world" did not limit itself to the empire (cf. the probable allusions to the Parthians and their expected contribution to the fall of the empire, their possible echo in the description of the warrior king and his armies in chapter 19, and the remote location of the nations in chapter 20 before the devil "gathers" them around the camp of the saints and the holy city). The kings who are gathered to Armaggedon in 16:14, otoh, are those of the oikoumenè (which very often means the empire, obviously so in Luke 2:1 but very likely in many places).