My chiastic work on the Book of Revelation

I can not help but laugh. This is so much fun. I never said that there were two versions of Revelation. I said that there are a multitude of linguistic devises that hide the message of The Book of Revelation. The same is true for Ezekiel, a book that I avoid at all costs. He starts out in Chapter 1 with the resurrection, and jumps all over the place from there. Not only that, but his metaphors are not consistent with the other prophets. Thus, your argument that I have an unproven assumption is false because I have never said there are two versions of Revelation. There is one version that I was given to understand and I am sharing that information with you.

Secondly, why would John not intentionally mix up the books in the second half of his work if he wanted to hide the message. It is a brilliant move on his part. It has nothing to do with confusing people since they have received the benefit of his work for 2,000 years. They were not confused but inspired to stay true to Lord Jesus. There is no confusion.

However, when it is time for Lord Jesus to return then our prophets arise from the dust and their hidden messages are revealed. The hidden message is that we are to prepare to survive a famine (Rev. 18:8) and a civil war (Isa. Chapter 19). We can see it all around us. Everyone is going crazy. They are lost in Satan's madness.

Right now we are at Isaiah Chapter 17, the fall of Damascus. Next is Chapter 18 that causes the work of the missionaries to stop, followed by Chapter 19.

Chapter 18 links to Psalms 110, and it is there that The Lord tells Lord Jesus (David's Lord) to wait while The Lord subdues Lord Jesus' enemies. That is the second woe in The Book of Revelation and it is clearly elaborated upon in Verses 19:11-21. If I were you I might want to hear what this crazy person has to say and consider it as a possibility. I am not here to argue points of doctrine like a philosopher. I am simply a student of scripture who has been weaned from the milk and drawn from the breasts (Isa. 28:9).

Reason with me as a follower of Christ and not like those who attacked Lord Jesus on the day of debate.

One way to envision it is that John wrote the entire text. Then he divided the text in half; after the earthquake at our present Verse 11:19. He then set the first half of the work aside, and separated the second half of his work into eleven chapters. He then rearranged these eleven chapters into the order that we have today. He then wrote multiple copies of this completed work (the entire book) and distributed it to the churches.

or

John wrote the entire text in his mind, divided the text in half, separated the second half into eleven chapters and rearranged them into the order that we have today. Then he wrote the text on paper and into multiple copies and distributed it to the churches.

In either case he was inspired of God to do this work. In the first case he would have wrote the original work and then rearranged it, and in the second case the work would have been rearranged prior to penning it to paper. There is no other way to explain why the chapters are out of order in the second half of the book. Except, to say that the reminiscing chapter, chapter 14, goes before the ending in Chapter 16. Or the great war in Chapter 19 follows the end in Chapter 16. It is so obvious that these chapters are out of order. The great war in Chapter 19 precedes the ending in Chapter 16, and the reminiscing chapter, Chapter 14, brings up the end.

socalexile

I did not realize there was a pattern of me doing this “every time” you expressed “discernment.”  I had forgotten all about the dragon incident until you brought it up.  I assure you it is not personal.  But it may be behavioral.

In this case, which is the only case I am aware of where you were involved, I “white-knighted” because you rudely misinterpreted what a new member had said.  I felt an injustice had been done to boraddict and I didn’t want your statement on the matter to be the final voice.  So I showed the watching forum that there was a different way to interpret what boraddict had said.  I did not attack you, I simply gave a different assessment of boraddicts words. And indeed, my way of interpreting it was what boraddict had meant as she later clarified.

This was not about you at all, socalexile.  As a matter of fact, I had no problem with the discernment part of your post.  Like you, I also am not at all convinced of the validity of boraddicts argument.  So you and I share the same discernment.  But you made a claim that boraddict said something she simply did not say and you said it in a rude manner by accusing the motive to be about promoting herself and her books.

I felt a rescue was in order in this case.  I am not aware of any other cases that you seem to feel have happened.  If you would like me to explain them, you may need to point them out.  You may want to look at my posts and you will realize that I do not attack people, but I will step in when I see a lack of civility taking place - particularly against a new member.

In which case you stated my exact point.  

It's also rude to insert yourself as the moral authority when two people are having a discussion that does not pertain to you, especially to defend against someone asking the hard questions - which is not rude at all. 

Thank you Natalie for your response. I prefer to stay away from commentaries because they might provide an incorrect interpretation on some portions of the text. So for me, to work in Ezekiel would involve going through the book word by word and that is so exhausting. Not to mention his Picasso style that is beautiful but near impossible for me to comprehend.

The message in The Book of Revelation was hidden to prevent Satan from corrupting the text. Secondly, the message was intended only for those who are invited to the exodus. That is, it is only for those who are going on the rapture to the exodus, and that is us. You and I are in the generation that is invited to go on the exodus. The previous generations over the past 2,000 years are not invited; therefore, it was not necessary for them and was hidden from them.

Daniel's vision is now unsealed with the knowledge of the linguistic devises that I have mentioned. Our knowledge has been increased and that is what unseals the book and this is referenced in Dan. 12:4. 


   

Someone who sweeps in to save the day, by posting a correction to someone else's error-ed attempt at correction.

Problem is, he restated my very point. And it wasn't an attempt at correction, but a plea for evidence to back claims being made. 

Please read the third paragraph in this link.