Jerusalem isn't mentioned by name in the book of Revelation.

reply to post by Deetermined

In case you didn't notice, the city that comes down from heaven is a perfect one, not the one we're seeing today.

I am "noticing", and why I brought it up.
The Jerusalem of Revelation (as pointed out in the OP) is not the physical place today being called by that name.
Obviously John is describing a spiritual entity.

The Bible also tells us what our bodies will be like, that we won't experience sorrow or pain, etc.

Huh? When, exactly, are we supposed to have such bodies? Revelation mentions "wiping away" tears.

It helps to put the whole Bible together to understand it and not just pieces of it. As for what physically happens to Jerusalem, is well described in the book of Zechariah, which is the Old Testament equivalent of Revelation.

Zechariah is talking about a literal kingdom in a spiritual way, Revelation is dealing with a spiritual kingdom described in terms that on the surface appears literal.

Just like some stories give more detail than others, depending on which book you're reading (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), you have to put them all together to get the full picture.

Is that why John said to not add anything to his book?

reply to post by jmdewey60


The new Jerusalem is the new heaven/earth, in which God will reside with man, after the existing heavens and earth pass away.

As far as what our bodies will be like...

Question: "What will we look like in Heaven?"

www.gotquestions.org...

reply to post by jmdewey60

Zechariah is talking about a literal kingdom in a spiritual way, Revelation is dealing with a spiritual kingdom described in terms that on the surface appears literal.

One leads to the other. Zechariah talks about the earthly kingdom during the Millennial period and Revelation picks up and talks about the permanent kingdom that replaces it.

reply to post by Deetermined

One leads to the other. Zechariah talks about the earthly kingdom during the Millennial period and Revelation picks up and talks about the permanent kingdom that replaces it.

I don't see how anyone can know all of that.
Can you explain how you arrived at that conclusion?
I've studied both books and don't see how they fit together like that.
Now, I could see how someone could start with a particular "end time" theory about predicting the future, and picking bits from the two books and jumbling them together to make something that superficially seems to support the theory.
That's what I call "proof text" theology rather than looking at a particular book and trying to understand what it is saying.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I don't see how anyone can know all of that.
Can you explain how you arrived at that conclusion?
I've studied both books and don't see how they fit together like that.

You have to read the wording carefully to be able to determine what happens here on earth and what doesn't.

We know from the book of Revelation 20 that there is a Millennial period here on earth before the new city is sent down from heaven. More detail on the spiritual new city that replaces it is given in Revelation 21.

Zechariah 13 describes what it will be like during the Millennial period. Due to Jesus' presence, the fact that it talks about the "land" and nations being cut off and people dying, tells us that this is a physical existence, not a spiritual one. Zechariah 14:9 tells how Jesus will be king over all of the "earth" during this time and everyone will know who he is. There is an earthly period that transitions into the spiritual one. Zechariah spends more time referring to the physical one, while Revelation spends more time focusing on the spiritual one.

reply to post by Deetermined

You have to read the wording carefully to be able to determine what happens here on earth and what doesn't.

All you are saying is that just reading the books does not inform you of this prediction theory. I already conceded to this fact, that you have to do a lot of word jumbling to come up with a "proof" of your theory.
Then your process of arriving at your theory is to say that the city in Rev. 20 is not the same as the city in Rev. 21, and that since it mentions a thousand years in Rev. 20, then what happens in Rev. 21 has to happen after the thousand years.

The above only works if you ignore the context and the story line.
Below I bring up what in Revelation works against your theory:

Rev. 20 calls it,

"the camp of God’s people, the city he loves".

Rev. 19 declares,

. . . the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready.

Rev. 21 has one of the seven angels say,

“Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.”

where it is going back to describe in detail what already happened in Rev. 19.

Zechariah 13 describes what it will be like during the Millennial period.

I mentions events in a hypothetical "On that day".

reply to post by jmdewey60


I have no idea the point you're trying to make here. The way you've worded it makes no sense to me.

reply to post by Deetermined

I have no idea the point you're trying to make here. The way you've worded it makes no sense to me.

The central point of your argument is that "the city" does not come to earth until after the thousand years of Rev. 20.
I just pointed out that it came in Rev. 19.
The bride is the "city" and the "wedding" is its "coming" to earth.
It already happened in chapter 19.

Revelation 19
6 Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting:

“Hallelujah!
For our Lord God Almighty reigns.
7 Let us rejoice and be glad
and give him glory!
For the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready.
8 Fine linen, bright and clean,
was given her to wear.”
(Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of God’s holy people.)

9 Then the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!” And he added, “These are the true words of God.”
(2011 NIV)

The thousand years comes into the story after that, in chapter 20.
Chapter 21 goes back in time to describe the attributes of the "bride" as it would have appeared upon its earlier "coming".

reply to post by Deetermined

Technically, when Jesus returns, he'll be punishing the whole world, Jerusalem included. He said he would also cut down every nation that comes against Jerusalem. We all know that the Muslims and Jews are fighting for control over Jerusalem. It's not that hard to figure out that LITERAL events are playing out, just like they were prophesied about.

Muslims and Jews are portrayed as fighting over Jerusalem. But both of us know that modern Israel has full over control Jerusalem. It is under Jewish control, NOT Muslim control - that Jerusalem has been hosting gay pride events and is home to brothels, casinos. It is the Israeli Jews - NOT the Arab Muslims.... who mock Jesus and Mary on their TV shows. Given all this, it is ridiculous to believe God re-established Israel to allow Jews to defile Jerusalem with godless activities.


Muslims believe that Jesus - an Israelite and the Messiah - will return and rule from Jerusalem. Don't expect it to be the same anti-christian, sin infested city of modern Jerusalem, that so many Christians defend.

God knows best.

reply to post by jmdewey60

The central point of your argument is that "the city" does not come to earth until after the thousand years of Rev. 20.

I just pointed out that it came in Rev. 19.

The bride is the "city" and the "wedding" is its "coming" to earth.

Revelation 19 is all about the battle of Armageddon that will take place right before the Millennium starts. This is where the beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire.

When the Millennium is over, in Revelation 20, Satan is released from the Abyss to try and battle God, the battle of Gog and Magog, before he's conquered and thrown into the lake of fire with the beast and false prophet.

Then, we see the new city come down in Revelation 21.

The bride may be preparing herself in Revelation 19 with the supper of the Lamb, but the bride doesn't come down until Revelation 21.

I know you're going to disagree with what I have to say next, so I'll just leave a link to explain it...

Question: "What is the marriage supper of the Lamb?"

www.gotquestions.org...

reply to post by Deetermined

I know you're going to disagree with what I have to say next, so I'll just leave a link to explain it...
Question: "What is the marriage supper of the Lamb?"
www.gotquestions.org...

OK, so you are just not going to say anything to explain it, then?
I can't exactly get into a discussion on it at that web page, and you seem incapable of, or unwilling to engage in, defending your belief.
This theory presented on your linked-to page is not completely new to me since I have seen it presented in one form or another on this forum in the past.
The theory that,

"For the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready."

somehow has nothing to do with a wedding, which seems weird to me regardless of the stretch made in arguing some prolonged period before its consummation.

For the sake of being informative to readers other than myself and Deetermined, what is being discussed here is: What is it that is threatened with attack from "Gog and Magog" in Revelation 20, whether it is (1) the actual enemy of Jesus and God somehow hiding behind literal city walls made by human hands (as Deetermined would have us believe), or if it is (2) God's people facing possible attack from Satan's force of persuasion, from within the sheltering arms of Jesus in his church (as I would say that it symbolizes).

reply to post by FlyersFan


1st Corn 2: "The natural man receive not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

God is love and this is why people can't accept writings like Revelations or even the entire Bible for that matter, because they don't understand that these are literal words to explain spiritual truths and messages. They are parables, stories, literal or not, to explain universal truths and teachings just as Jesus did when he gave teaching.

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea the deep things of God."

Anyone can read the book but are you looking deeper into the meaning of those words? If not you will just end up in historical and wise debates walking away with no spiritual food for thought that can change you into a better person.

P.S. The soul is female, the bride is the soul. The soul bride is the one that has prepared and offered itself to God after being testified. Isaiah 61v10

sk0rpi0n
Muslims believe that Jesus - an Israelite and the Messiah - will return and rule from Jerusalem. Don't expect it to be the same anti-christian, sin infested city of modern Jerusalem, that so many Christians defend.

So ... according to you Revelation is from God and it somehow proves that the Jews in Jerusalem are bad and/or will be punished for sins that took place thousands of years ago. Well .. if Revelation is from God and you but into it, then of course you buy into how Revelation has Jesus stating that He is God ... right?

Isaiah 44:6 God says "I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God."
Isaiah 48:12, God says "I am he; I am the first and I am the last,"
Revelation 1:7-8 Behold He is coming with the clouds, and every eye shall see Him, even those who pierced HIm; all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be AMEN. "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

Or do you think the only part of Revelation that is from God and is accurate is the part that fits your anti Jewish ... Jerusalem is bad ... agenda??

reply to post by FlyersFan

So ... according to you Revelation is from God and it somehow proves that the Jews in Jerusalem are bad and/or will be punished for sins that took place thousands of years ago.

Any Christian educated in the Old Testament will tell you that Revelations churns out themes already spoken of in the Old Testament... with a few new bits.

Or do you think the only part of Revelation that is from God and is accurate is the part that fits your anti Jewish ... Jerusalem is bad ... agenda??

Don't blame me for all the "Jerusalem is bad" bits in the Bible.

sk0rpi0n
Any Christian educated in the Old Testament will tell you that Revelations churns out themes already spoken of in the Old Testament... with a few new bits.

Sure .. which is why I don't buy that it's from God. It's probably just an old fella who was steeped in religion having dementia driven dreams toward the end of his life ... while living a stressful time in exile and probably not eating all that healthy.

It's just like the Qu'ran ... churning out themes, bits and pieces, already spoken of in Judiasm, Christianity, Paganism and Zoroastarianism. Nothing new. Just repackaging and screwing up the stories.

Don't blame me for all the "Jerusalem is bad" bits in the Bible.

You avoided the question .. again.

If you believe that the Book of Revelation is from God ... and you believe it's God saying that Jerusalem/Jews are bad .... then you must also believe that the Book of Revelation confirms that Jesus is God. Or do you just accept those parts of Revelation that correspond to your notion of a bad Jerusalem??

reply to post by FlyersFan

"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

The above is from your quote from Revelation.
I don't see how it is Jesus saying that.
It is bunched in with several slogans in use apparently by the churches that John was affiliated with.

reply to post by jmdewey60

The above is from your quote from Revelation.
I don't see how it is Jesus saying that.

All it takes is reading the entire chapter of Revelation 1.

reply to post by FlyersFan

which is why I don't buy that it's from God.

If you don't believe the premise of my thread, good for you.

Flyersfans opinions = NOT facts.

logical7
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

Nice post!

Its very obvious that the city/country that now occupies the area is as ungodly as it can get.
The israel is preparing for the coming of their Messiah but only a fool would think that they are waiting for Jesus pbuh. More likely they would believe the Anti-Christ to be their messiah and its stupid to think that AC will rule over and get accepted by a righteous and godly israel

more likely that a corrupt, greedy, fornicating group would follow the AC at least till Jesus pbuh returns and kills the AC.

You could say exactly the same of the Islam faith.