The 7 year tribulation theory is a mathematical impossibility.

[ross3421]

AC is the antichrist, also called the beast.
He has already been thrown into the pit - we are not told when, but it seems this occurred BEFORE John was given this Revelation, as John is told the beast WAS.

There has to be scripture pointing to this event.

But if he comes up in ch 11 how can he come up later in ch 13 or elsewhere?

Which beast do you see as the AC? First or second in Rev 13?

Do you see the AC as Satan? In your opinion is the AC a man spirit or what? Can anything other than a spirit entity come up from a pit?

In your view we really have a "revolving" door down there as the entrance to this pit. Does it not seem strange multiple times entities be thrown and released from this pit

I really get the impression you do not understand your own belief on this matter.

[Tony P]

First woe Satan is already in pit. He is the king of the pit which releasesthe prisoners. Is14.

Second woe Satan comes up from pit and kills 2w at end of 1260.

Third Woe the 7 vials and Christs return.

First Woe concludes the 1260.
Second Woe starts the last 75 days
Third Woe starts the last week and concludes with second coming.

So the third Woe cannot be when Satan is cast for it is 1260 days. Therefore the Woe in Rev 12 is not one of the three woes specifically though it does involve all three

Satan is never in the abyss until Christ puts him there for the Millennium. Notice satan is in heaven in Rev 12. He is cast out of heaven, not the abyss. The king of the abyss isn't satan.

[Tony P]

The 7th Trumpet comes quickly there is not time for 1260 more days

This is where Amil doesn't hold up. There is indeed 1260 days of the beast after the 7th Trumpet. If the 7th trumpet was the end of all things it would be at the end of Revelation, not the middle. The order in Revelation must be kept to have any chance of figuring it out.

[Tony P]

[SIZE=2][FONT=verdana]

There is, as I've said before, another possibility. These periods are all the same period, or a portion within the same period. The sequence of the visions are non-chronological. There is, of course, a chronological sequence to the giving of the visions. One happens after another in John's time. But that doesn't mean the visions represent different times, happening one after another.

I personally believe the Reign of Antichrist, the time of the testimony of the 2 Witnesses, and the protection of the Woman in the Wilderness are all corresponding periods of time, a 3.5 years period. And that's because it accords with the original chronology of the Reign of Antichrist given in Daniel 7.

Many agree. The problem is the text itself makes this impossible. Each of the three Woes is specifically stated as ending before the next one starts. That was the point of this thread.

8:13 “Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the remaining blasts of the trumpet of the three angels who are about to sound!”

9:12 One woe is past. Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.

11:14 The second woe is past. Behold, the third woe is coming quickly.

Each of these woes occur in sequence. They cannot occur at the same time. If there is zero time between woes, and zero time for the 200 million man army in the 6th trumpet, there is still more than 7 years represented. 5 months, 1260 days, and another 1260 days. Let alone any time whatsoever for any seals or the first 4 trumpets. The 7 year trib deal is impossible.

I don't think Jeremiah describes the Post-Rapture period. The idea of a 49 year Tribulation Period doesn't follow the pattern for trouble that belongs to the saints. Israel in her fallen state has had tribulation for many generations. But the saints usually have a limited time of intense tribulation--often 3.5 years.

The saints are actually flown into the wilderness for the last 3.5 years away from the presence of the dragon and beast. Those who see this and fear God are the ones who get persecuted and beheaded.

Psalm 40:1 I waited patiently for the Lord;
And He inclined to me,
And heard my cry.
2 He also brought me up out of a horrible pit,
Out of the miry clay,
And set my feet upon a rock,
And established my steps.
3 He has put a new song in my mouth—
Praise to our God;
Many will see it and fear,
And will trust in the Lord.

That is why the beheaded saints are the first resurrection. They will be resurrected to rejoin the saints previously gathered in the wilderness.

[randyk]

Many agree. The problem is the text itself makes this impossible. Each of the three Woes is specifically stated as ending before the next one starts. That was the point of this thread.

8:13 “Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the remaining blasts of the trumpet of the three angels who are about to sound!”

9:12 One woe is past. Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.

11:14 The second woe is past. Behold, the third woe is coming quickly.

Each of these woes occur in sequence. They cannot occur at the same time. If there is zero time between woes, and zero time for the 200 million man army in the 6th trumpet, there is still more than 7 years represented. 5 months, 1260 days, and another 1260 days. Let alone any time whatsoever for any seals or the first 4 trumpets. The 7 year trib deal is impossible.

I guess you're missing *my* point! What I'm saying is that the woes do *not* have to represent a chronological sequence. They could be just the sequence of the visions, one taking place one after another in *John's* time frame. There is no chronological connection between these visions of necessity. They just happen one after the other in the narrative. Obviously, if you're going to tell 3 stories in a row, one is going to have to be 1st, the 2nd is going to be 2nd, and the 3rd is going to be last. These stories do not have to represent stories of 3 lives happening one after another in time. They are simply 3 different stories with their own independent time frames.

You might object that 3 woes are different than 3 stories. They *must* happen one after another in time. But why? They are 3 distinct visions, just like 3 different stories. Their histories could run concurrently! The last woe may speak of Christ's Coming, but so might the other previous 2 woes! In fact, I think you'll find that to be the case!

What is the proof of this? For one, I can tell you it's a fact that Christ's coming is portrayed not just once, but several times, in the Revelation. Those visions clearly take place concurrently.

Rev 1.7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him...
Rev 6.16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!"
Rev 11.15“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah...
Rev 16.15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.” 16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
Rev 19.11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True.

These verses are from distinct visions with their own time frame, and obviously take place concurrently. It *does not matter* that they take place sequentially in the narrative. Narrative sequence does *not* equal a chronology. These are many different visions, often times repeating the same events using different language, or emphasizing different things. I could provide a number of more references to Christ's Coming. But I rest my case.

The same is true for some of the events that take place in the Great Tribulation, or the 3.5 years Reign of the Beast. The same story is told again and again, using different words. My theory here is that the 1st two woes cover the same period of time describing different events or different aspects of the same event.

The 1st woe includes the 5 month locust plague, as well as the 200 million man Army that kills 1/3 of mankind, beginning at the River Euphrates. That corresponds with the Battle of Armageddon described in Rev 16, which also begins at the River Euphrates.

The 2nd woe describes the time of the 2 Witnesses, a 3.5 years period, which corresponds with the 3.5 years Reign of Antichrist mentioned in Rev 13.

The 3rd woe is the judgment that takes place at Christ's Coming, when he comes to establish his Kingdom. Obviously, these woes are simply separate stories recounting the same general period of time. The woes take place consecutively in the narrative. But that does not necessarily indicate a chronological order in their fulfillment!

The saints are actually flown into the wilderness for the last 3.5 years away from the presence of the dragon and beast. Those who see this and fear God are the ones who get persecuted and beheaded.

Psalm 40:1 I waited patiently for the Lord;
And He inclined to me,
And heard my cry.
2 He also brought me up out of a horrible pit,
Out of the miry clay,
And set my feet upon a rock,
And established my steps.
3 He has put a new song in my mouth—
Praise to our God;
Many will see it and fear,
And will trust in the Lord.

That is why the beheaded saints are the first resurrection. They will be resurrected to rejoin the saints previously gathered in the wilderness.

[Jesuslovesus]

I guess you're missing *my* point! What I'm saying is that the woes do *not* have to represent a chronological sequence. They could be just the sequence of the visions, one taking place one after another in *John's* time frame. There is no chronological connection between these visions of necessity. They just happen one after the other in the narrative. Obviously, if you're going to tell 3 stories in a row, one is going to have to be 1st, the 2nd is going to be 2nd, and the 3rd is going to be last. These stories do not have to represent stories of 3 lives happening one after another in time. They are simply 3 different stories with their own independent time frames.

You might object that 3 woes are different than 3 stories. They *must* happen one after another in time. But why? They are 3 distinct visions, just like 3 different stories. Their histories could run concurrently! The last woe may speak of Christ's Coming, but so might the other previous 2 woes! In fact, I think you'll find that to be the case!

this isn't the first time you made this argument overall its still false. Revelations 8:13 Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew directly overhead, “Woe, woe, woe to those who dwell on the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!” This passage here shows that the trumpets happen in order.
Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come This passage shows the same thing!
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed; behold, the third woe is soon to come.

These passages show that these 3 woes are clearly IN ORDER and DO not RUN Concurrently.

What is the proof of this? For one, I can tell you it's a fact that Christ's coming is portrayed not just once, but several times, in the Revelation. Those visions clearly take place concurrently.

Rev 1.7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him...
Rev 6.16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!"
Rev 11.15“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah...
Rev 16.15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.” 16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
Rev 19.11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True.

These verses are from distinct visions with their own time frame, and obviously take place concurrently. It *does not matter* that they take place sequentially in the narrative. Narrative sequence does *not* equal a chronology. These are many different visions, often times repeating the same events using different language, or emphasizing different things. I could provide a number of more references to Christ's Coming. But I rest my case.

This argument is so weak it blows me away that you keep making it. You equate him saying i'm coming with him actually arriving. None of the passages you quote happen concurrently. Revelations 6:16 doesn't happen at his coming but when he opens the 6th seal, Revelations 11:19 also has no mention of his coming. Revelations 16:15 is him saying hey i'm coming like a thief. Revelations 19:11 Is him actually coming. You claim you could have provided more references please if your planning to try to actually group the events that are actually the same.

Overall this argument your making is flawed and wrong, all of these events do NOT happen concurrently. Using this flawed argument to prove anything is false overall if you gonna say these are the same events at least get similar events. Christ saying he's coming clearly isn't the same thing as him actually coming as you seem to be claiming .

This is not proof of anything besides the fact that you can't tell the difference between someone saying how they come and them actually arriving.

The same is true for some of the events that take place in the Great Tribulation, or the 3.5 years Reign of the Beast. The same story is told again and again, using different words. My theory here is that the 1st two woes cover the same period of time describing different events or different aspects of the same event.

The 1st woe includes the 5 month locust plague, as well as the 200 million man Army that kills 1/3 of mankind, beginning at the River Euphrates. That corresponds with the Battle of Armageddon described in Rev 16, which also begins at the River Euphrates.

The 2nd woe describes the time of the 2 Witnesses, a 3.5 years period, which corresponds with the 3.5 years Reign of Antichrist mentioned in Rev 13.

The 3rd woe is the judgment that takes place at Christ's Coming, when he comes to establish his Kingdom. Obviously, these woes are simply separate stories recounting the same general period of time. The woes take place consecutively in the narrative. But that does not necessarily indicate a chronological order in their fulfillment!

The bible clearly says these events happen in chronological order your flawed logic above doesn't change this, the bible clearly says that before the next woe begins the woe previous to it has Finished. The fact that you use a flawed argument to make your case just shows overall it holds no water.

[Tony P]

I guess you're missing *my* point! What I'm saying is that the woes do *not* have to represent a chronological sequence. They could be just the sequence of the visions, one taking place one after another in *John's* time frame. There is no chronological connection between these visions of necessity. They just happen one after the other in the narrative. Obviously, if you're going to tell 3 stories in a row, one is going to have to be 1st, the 2nd is going to be 2nd, and the 3rd is going to be last. These stories do not have to represent stories of 3 lives happening one after another in time. They are simply 3 different stories with their own independent time frames.

You might object that 3 woes are different than 3 stories. They *must* happen one after another in time. But why? They are 3 distinct visions, just like 3 different stories. Their histories could run concurrently! The last woe may speak of Christ's Coming, but so might the other previous 2 woes! In fact, I think you'll find that to be the case!

What is the proof of this? For one, I can tell you it's a fact that Christ's coming is portrayed not just once, but several times, in the Revelation. Those visions clearly take place concurrently.

Rev 1.7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him...
Rev 6.16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!"
Rev 11.15“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah...
Rev 16.15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.” 16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
Rev 19.11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True.

These verses are from distinct visions with their own time frame, and obviously take place concurrently. It *does not matter* that they take place sequentially in the narrative. Narrative sequence does *not* equal a chronology. These are many different visions, often times repeating the same events using different language, or emphasizing different things. I could provide a number of more references to Christ's Coming. But I rest my case.

The same is true for some of the events that take place in the Great Tribulation, or the 3.5 years Reign of the Beast. The same story is told again and again, using different words. My theory here is that the 1st two woes cover the same period of time describing different events or different aspects of the same event.

The 1st woe includes the 5 month locust plague, as well as the 200 million man Army that kills 1/3 of mankind, beginning at the River Euphrates. That corresponds with the Battle of Armageddon described in Rev 16, which also begins at the River Euphrates.

The 2nd woe describes the time of the 2 Witnesses, a 3.5 years period, which corresponds with the 3.5 years Reign of Antichrist mentioned in Rev 13.

The 3rd woe is the judgment that takes place at Christ's Coming, when he comes to establish his Kingdom. Obviously, these woes are simply separate stories recounting the same general period of time. The woes take place consecutively in the narrative. But that does not necessarily indicate a chronological order in their fulfillment!

I do get your point here. Have you ever noticed that your whole concept of the end revolves around a single premise. That the coming of Jesus is a single event. It is much the same as most pre-tribbers that begin with a premise of two events, and then shoehorn everything into one of the two. What I am saying is beginning with any solid conclusions is a recipe for error. I know this is just human nature, but why do we do this?

For example, the single event folks see several "comings" in Revelation and THEN assume Revelation MUST be several different vision from different angles. Beginning with the premise leads to a certain interpretation. What if that premise is wrong?

Likewise, most pre-trib folks see a rapture, followed by a later return of Jesus. Most see a rapture in Rev 5 or 6, followed by the 7th trumpet or white horse coming of Jesus. This preconceived premise also creates problems as the mystery of God is finished at the 7th trumpet. Therefore many of them then have to rearrange the text to force Rev 11 and Rev 19 to occur at the same time. What if this premise is also wrong?

What if the coming of Jesus comes in multiple stages? Why begin with any solid conclusions before approaching Revelation? I think that is where the problem lies with nearly everyone, post-tribs and pre-tribs. If we can leave all the preconceived baggage at the door and just read Revelation, it will exactly match what is written in the OT. It will also show that Jesus knew what he was talking about here:

Luke 12:35 “Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; 36 and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. 38 And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

[ForHisglory]

There has to be scripture pointing to this event.

Really?
There is scripture and it is in Revelation.

But if he comes up in ch 11 how can he come up later in ch 13 or elsewhere?

Actually he comes up in Rev 9, but this is explained in Rev 11 and futher in Rev 13.

Which beast do you see as the AC? First or second in Rev 13?

There are three creatures. The first is called a dragon which is Satan. The second, yet called simply a beast, and thus the first "beast" is the AC. The third creature, which is the second "beast" is called the false prophet.

Do you see the AC as Satan? In your opinion is the AC a man spirit or what? Can anything other than a spirit entity come up from a pit?

The Ac is clearly separate from Satan. However there IS the spirit of the AC, and then there is the AC himself. The AC is a man in whom the spirit of the AC dwells.

In your view we really have a "revolving" door down there as the entrance to this pit. Does it not seem strange multiple times entities be thrown and released from this pit

No revolving door. You go to the pit when you are placed there. This seems to be when angelic beings leave their first estate and dwell as humans and then die and so enter the pit. Notice ONLY God opens the pit, for He has the key. Yet He opens it in Rev 9, which is an opportunity for the fallen angels to obey him, or like the beast continue to rebel.

I really get the impression you do not understand your own belief on this matter.

My beliefs are quite clear and simple, but you seem to be trying to make them fit into your own ideas which doesn't work.

[ForHisglory]

I do get your point here. Have you ever noticed that your whole concept of the end revolves around a single premise. That the coming of Jesus is a single event. It is much the same as most pre-tribbers that begin with a premise of two events, and then shoehorn everything into one of the two. What I am saying is beginning with any solid conclusions is a recipe for error. I know this is just human nature, but why do we do this?

For example, the single event folks see several "comings" in Revelation and THEN assume Revelation MUST be several different vision from different angles. Beginning with the premise leads to a certain interpretation. What if that premise is wrong?

Likewise, most pre-trib folks see a rapture, followed by a later return of Jesus. Most see a rapture in Rev 5 or 6, followed by the 7th trumpet or white horse coming of Jesus. This preconceived premise also creates problems as the mystery of God is finished at the 7th trumpet. Therefore many of them then have to rearrange the text to force Rev 11 and Rev 19 to occur at the same time. What if this premise is also wrong?

What if the coming of Jesus comes in multiple stages? Why begin with any solid conclusions before approaching Revelation? I think that is where the problem lies with nearly everyone, post-tribs and pre-tribs. If we can leave all the preconceived baggage at the door and just read Revelation, it will exactly match what is written in the OT. It will also show that Jesus knew what he was talking about here:

Luke 12:35 “Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; 36 and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. 38 And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

Actually we are told there is ONLY a SINGULAR Second Coming of Jesus.
However we ARE told of a revealing which occurs beforehand.
Now a pre-tribber latches onto that and makes more of it than it is.
A post-tribber generally ignores it, partly because it seems like pre-trib, and partly because they haven't quite got things worked out.

Zech 14 actually is quite helpful, because through this you are forced to realise there is more than one day.
One of those days IS the ONE day when Jesus returns, but there are other days which occur, on which other things happen which we try to shoe horn into the preconceived pattern of pre or post.
When we are freed from trying to force everything into EVERY usage of a word or phrase meaning it is ALWAYS the same thing being referenced, then you can grasp each concept contextually to build a fuller cohesive picture of what is happening.

[Jesuslovesus]

Actually we are told there is ONLY a SINGULAR Second Coming of Jesus.

Just Curious Which one do you classify as his only one singular second coming? When he coming in the clouds and the whole world see's him and the nations mourn or his coming on a white house with the Saints for Armageddon?

[TheDivineWatermark]

I think that is where the problem lies with nearly everyone, post-tribs and pre-tribs. If we can leave all the preconceived baggage at the door and just read Revelation, it will exactly match what is written in the OT. It will also show that Jesus knew what he was talking about here:

Luke 12:35 “Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; 36 and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. 38 And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

I agree with a few of your points (I believe Pre-trib is accurate, biblically). Where I disagree (somewhat slightly) is here, where you quote this passage. I believe it is a "2nd Coming to the earth passage" (His "RETURN"... ""when he will RETURN FROM the wedding"... THEN the meal, i.e. the wedding FEAST/SUPPER, aka the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom).

I agree with where you say that it will match what is written (meaning, things that occurred back then are also pictures of how prophecy will play out... for example, Rev19 would correlate with the time when "kings go out to battle" and kings were "crowned" [a specific day, per OT Scripture]).

As for the "watches" (IN THE NIGHT), I don't believe any of those apply to our rapture (I'll get to that in a second)... the "IN THE NIGHT" passages refer to that specific time period leading UP TO His 2nd Coming to the earth (FOR the MK), that is, "the Day of the Lord [the long time period]" will ARRIVE "as a thief IN THE NIGHT" (the "in his time" of the "man of sin"). The Church which is His body (that's us) will be "changed/glorified" in what it says "in the twinkling of an eye," which refers to "the precise moment when one day turns into the next, when the sun is 8-degrees below the horizon, at sundown" [i.e. "DARK"... commencing the "DARK" portion of the Day of the Lord time period; all 'days' start the evening before--so that is our rapture, and 2Th2 says "that Day [the DOTL] will not be PRESENT if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST [our rapture FIRST]..." (the "man of sin" in IN the Day of the Lord ["DARK" portion], as he "is revealed" in its initial moment/1st Seal/1st "birth PANG [singular-1Th5:2-3]")].

Then, when it comes to the "IN THE NIGHT" portion, there are "watches" (in the night). I believe the Luke 12 passage is telling them about that (as you do--but I don't see it as lasting as long as you do, I see it lasting the "7-yrs/70th-Wk " [you may have seen my post stating the "he, he, he" of Dan9:27 is the "who, who, who" of 2Th2:3-8, his "beginning," his "middle," his "end"--same length of time--7-yrs in each of these 2 passages])...

so, when viewing "which watch" He will actually "come unto them" [see also Hosea 6:3 "come unto us/Israel"] (this is His 2nd Coming to the earth context, as I see it), it will actually be the "watch" in which (DURING His life and ministry) this was played out (in what we read in the gospel accounts). There was only one watch (described therein) where "He came [cometh / went] unto them"... and that is the one I see as being a picture of that future time (when He comes at His 2nd Coming to the earth).

Also, there will be "a cry at midnight" saying "go ye out to meet Him" [before the aforementioned ] (I don't see this parable as referring to the rapture of "the Church which is His body" as you do, though... but of the time period leading UP TO His 2nd Coming to the earth, FOR the MK/wedding FEAST/SUPPER[Mt25:10nasb]/the kingdom of the heavens [on the earth, once He "returns" there]).

Hope that made some sense.



[I didn't really address the OP, but in my studies of the chronology (which I've outlined briefly in past posts), I do see precisely 2520 days / 7-yrs (of 360-day-yrs) in that future time period commonly called the tribulation, which leads up to His 2nd Coming to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly MK/wedding FEAST-SUPPER/kingdom of the heavens]


Adding this, the "blessed" passages referring to their entrance (those entering) into the MK time period include: Dan12:12, Matt25:31-34, Lk12:36-37,38,40,42-44, Matt24:44-46, Rev 16:15, Rev19:9, etc...



As for the "7 years":

l------X------l------X------l [<---my basic depiction of the "7 yrs"... with the 2 "X's" referring to the beginning and end of the 2 Witnesses' 1260-day ministry [running concurrently with Trumpets 1-6]... and the middle line [approx] being the time of the 5th Trumpet/1st "Woe" unto the earth... the Seals come before the first "X" and the 7th Trumpet and 7 Vials at and after the last "X"... (In my chronology, each of these markings is placed at a significant calendar date derived from Scripture)]

[randyk]

this isn't the first time you made this argument overall its still false. Revelations 8:13 Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew directly overhead, “Woe, woe, woe to those who dwell on the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!” This passage here shows that the trumpets happen in order.
Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come This passage shows the same thing!
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed; behold, the third woe is soon to come.

These passages show that these 3 woes are clearly IN ORDER and DO not RUN Concurrently.

You are just *asserting* this--not proving it. You aren't at all responding to what I said in any detail whatsoever. Just claiming they happen one after another and *proving it* are 2 different things!

As I said, 3 woes are mentioned, and the 3 woes are mentioned sequentially, but *none of these* means the events cannot run concurrent with one another! They are sequential only in terms of narrating the visions--they do not depict a time sequence from one to the other!

I'm not sure you really understand my argument here. Let me use your quotes and try to explain again...

Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed [in John's then-current view]; behold, two woes are still to come [in John's then-current view]...
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed [in John's then-current view]; behold, the third woe is soon to come [in John's then-current view].

What you're reading it as is incorrect in my view. You're reading it as follows...
Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed [in the time of its fulfillment]; behold, two woes are still to come [following the time of the fulfillment of the first woe]...
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed [in the time of its fulfillment]; behold, the third woe is soon to come [following the time of the fulfillment of the second woe].

You see, I'm talking about *John's time* in which he sees the vision of the 3 woes. He obviously sees them consecutively and sequentially, as he views one after the other. But you're talking about the *time of the fulfillment of these visions,* which you believe must happen sequentially in their *fulfillment.* Although there is a progressive development in the visions towards some kind of conclusion to the overall narrative, there is no rule that one vision must follow another in their fulfillment in the same way that they happen from John's perspective!

If the Lord gave me 7 visions, I would have to see them consecutively one after another--I could not see all 7 visions all at the same time! And if I see all 7 visions consecutively, does that mean their fulfillment must happen chronologically? No, not at all! I might even say that I saw the 1st vision first at 1:00, then the 1st vision is concluded at 1:30. Then the 2nd vision happened at 1:30 and continued until it was finished at 5:00. Then following the 2nd vision I had another vision at 5:00 which concluded at 5:30. Just because I *saw these visions* in chronological sequence *in my own time* does *not* mean that the *fulfillments* of these visions will be in chronological sequence likewise!

So, if John saw the visions of the 3 woes sequentially, does that mean they have a chronological order? No, not at all! That would be like saying the books of the Bible are sequential, from Genesis to Revelation, and so each book must have fulfillments that take place in chronological order! But that would be ridiculous, because many of the books of the Prophets reiterate the same judgments, and the same prophetic events!

Same with these 3 woes and the book of Revelation overall. They depict many different visions in some kind of narrative sequence, but that *does not mean* that their fulfillments will necessarily have a chronological sequence in the order the visions are given!

I go to pains to make this argument because I personally believe it is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to understanding the book of Revelation.

This argument is so weak it blows me away that you keep making it. You equate him saying i'm coming with him actually arriving. None of the passages you quote happen concurrently. Revelations 6:16 doesn't happen at his coming but when he opens the 6th seal, Revelations 11:19 also has no mention of his coming. Revelations 16:15 is him saying hey i'm coming like a thief. Revelations 19:11 Is him actually coming. You claim you could have provided more references please if your planning to try to actually group the events that are actually the same.

I don't agree with you. Not only do I have a *strong* argument here--it is virtually undeniable. What you're saying here, irrationally, is that reference to Christ's Coming *cannot* refer to Christ's Coming!

Not only is your argument *weak* here, but it is *irrational!* Now, you may make the argument that "mention" of Christ's Coming does not mean "actual event." Okay, but I believe that to be weak. Let's look at whose argument is "weaker"...

Randy: "Look he is coming with the clouds." This actually refers to Christ's actual coming.
Jesuslovesus: "Look he is coming with the clouds." This does not refer to Christ's actual coming. It is strictly a *mention* of this event, and not the *actual event!*Now, which argument is truly "weaker?" Yours, obviously. I'm not saying you don't have an argument. I'm just saying that you're skating on thin ice the *way you're framing the argument.*

Overall this argument your making is flawed and wrong, all of these events do NOT happen concurrently. Using this flawed argument to prove anything is false overall if you gonna say these are the same events at least get similar events. Christ saying he's coming clearly isn't the same thing as him actually coming as you seem to be claiming .

This is not proof of anything besides the fact that you can't tell the difference between someone saying how they come and them actually arriving.

The bible clearly says these events happen in chronological order your flawed logic above doesn't change this, the bible clearly says that before the next woe begins the woe previous to it has Finished. The fact that you use a flawed argument to make your case just shows overall it holds no water.

No, you don't yet understand my argument. The chronological sequence is only in the *experience of John* as he sees the visions sequentially. They are *not said* biblically to be in a chronological order *in terms of their fulfillment.*

I provided sufficient evidence to show you that there is more than one vision, so that the book of Revelation does not have a specific chronology from Rev 1 to Rev 22. In fact there are *many visions!* Clearly, they do not all get fulfilled in chronological order.

Nor is there always a specific chronology given in any particular vision. For example, the 3 woes are all part of a single vision, and yet all 3 woes are independent visions in themselves. And though they are narrated sequentially that does not mean they have a chronological order among them.

And Christ's Coming, though it will only happen once in future history, is portrayed a *number of times* in these visions. This does *not* mean that Christ will come several times in chronological order from Rev 1 to Rev 22!

Not only is Christ's Coming portrayed not once but several times, but the period of Antichrist's Reign is mentioned not just once, but several times. It is mentioned as a "time, times, and half a time," as "42 months," and as "1260 days." These visions refer to the same general history of the endtimes, and portray the *same time period* in different ways, using different visions.

You are not correct--there is no specific chronology given by the Bible to indicate a chronological sequence...
a. from Rev 1 to Rev 22,
b. or, from one vision to another,
c. or, from events described within a single vision.

There is a *big difference* between the *chronological sequence of fulfillments* and the chronological sequence in which God gave the vision to John, or the *Narrative Sequence.* You are conflating the two, in my opinion.

Biblically, there is no chronological sequence given to show that these visions have *fulfillments* that will be one after the other. For example, there is nothing that says the fulfillment of the Man Child in Rev 12 will follow in chronological sequence after the arrival of Christ's Kingdom in Rev 11. Obviously, the arrival of Christ's Kingdom, mentioned in Rev 11, *follows* the fulfillment of the vision of the Man-Child, which took place at Christ's birth! The order of the chapters, and the order of the visions, do *not* indicate a chronological sequence here!

[Jesuslovesus]

[QUOTE=randyk;3360953]You are just *asserting* this--not proving it. You aren't at all responding to what I said in any detail whatsoever. Just claiming they happen one after another and *proving it* are 2 different things!

As I said, 3 woes are mentioned, and the 3 woes are mentioned sequentially, but *none of these* means the events cannot run concurrent with one another! They are sequential only in terms of narrating the visions--they do not depict a time sequence from one to the other!

I'm not sure you really understand my argument here. Let me use your quotes and try to explain again...

Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed [in John's then-current view]; behold, two woes are still to come [in John's then-current view]...
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed [in John's then-current view]; behold, the third woe is soon to come [in John's then-current view].

What you're reading it as is incorrect in my view. You're reading it as follows...
Revelations 9:12 The first woe has passed [in the time of its fulfillment]; behold, two woes are still to come [following the time of the fulfillment of the first woe]...
Revelations 11:14 The second woe has passed [in the time of its fulfillment]; behold, the third woe is soon to come [following the time of the fulfillment of the second woe].

You see, I'm talking about *John's time* in which he sees the vision of the 3 woes. He obviously sees them consecutively and sequentially, as he views one after the other. But you're talking about the *time of the fulfillment of these visions,* which you believe must happen sequentially in their *fulfillment.* Although there is a progressive development in the visions towards some kind of conclusion to the overall narrative, there is no rule that one vision must follow another in their fulfillment in the same way that they happen from John's perspective!

If the Lord gave me 7 visions, I would have to see them consecutively one after another--I could not see all 7 visions all at the same time! And if I see all 7 visions consecutively, does that mean their fulfillment must happen chronologically? No, not at all! I might even say that I saw the 1st vision first at 1:00, then the 1st vision is concluded at 1:30. Then the 2nd vision happened at 1:30 and continued until it was finished at 5:00. Then following the 2nd vision I had another vision at 5:00 which concluded at 5:30. Just because I *saw these visions* in chronological sequence *in my own time* does *not* mean that the *fulfillments* of these visions will be in chronological sequence likewise!

I honestly have no idea what your talking about it seems like your building this view on the idea that John had multiple visions but the text doesn't say he was given multiple vision so where do you draw condition (multiple visions) for your premise this vision are seen in order but the order is not set by the order of the vision given. John says there are 7 trumpets the 7 trumpet are blown one at a time you can interchange the trumpets that are blown but the order of what happens as each is blown and the events that follow is indeed set

So, if John saw the visions of the 3 woes sequentially, does that mean they have a chronological order? No, not at all! That would be like saying the books of the Bible are sequential, from Genesis to Revelation, and so each book must have fulfillments that take place in chronological order! But that would be ridiculous, because many of the books of the Prophets reiterate the same judgments, and the same prophetic events!

This is clearly not a similar comparison. It would me more apt so say is Genesis sequential (which it is) as are most of the books of the bible for this matter.

Same with these 3 woes and the book of Revelation overall. They depict many different visions in some kind of narrative sequence, but that *does not mean* that their fulfillments will necessarily have a chronological sequence in the order the visions are given!

I go to pains to make this argument because I personally believe it is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to understanding the book of Revelation.

Not sure what you mean your interpretation would lead to more confusion then imaginable.

I don't agree with you. Not only do I have a *strong* argument here--it is virtually undeniable. What you're saying here, irrationally, is that reference to Christ's Coming *cannot* refer to Christ's Coming!

Not only is your argument *weak* here, but it is *irrational!* Now, you may make the argument that "mention" of Christ's Coming does not mean "actual event." Okay, but I believe that to be weak. Let's look at whose argument is "weaker"...

Randy: "Look he is coming with the clouds." This actually refers to Christ's actual coming.
Jesuslovesus: "Look he is coming with the clouds." This does not refer to Christ's actual coming. It is strictly a *mention* of this event, and not the *actual event!*Now, which argument is truly "weaker?" Yours, obviously. I'm not saying you don't have an argument. I'm just saying that you're skating on thin ice the *way you're framing the argument.*

Sorry but no your argument is indeed weak, you also seem to think i was making an argument but i really wasn't to trying to compare them is silly. I know its hard for ppl to stay on track so i'll spell it out quite simply.

This is your argument.

Their histories could run concurrently! The last woe may speak of Christ's Coming, but so might the other previous 2 woes! In fact, I think you'll find that to be the case!

You then offer this as proof

What is the proof of this? For one, I can tell you it's a fact that Christ's coming is portrayed not just once, but several times, in the Revelation. Those visions clearly take place concurrently.

So your argument here is based on the idea that the passages you then list happen concurrently. Rev 1.7 Rev 6.16 Rev 11.15“ Rev 16.15 Rev 19.11.

This argument is indeed weak and i no ways *strong* argument or it is virtually undeniable. It fails on many counts.

1. Not all of these passages are visions Rev 1.7 specifically is Johns opening address to the 7 churches in Asia
2. Not all of these passages speak about the same event. Some speak of his coming in the clouds while Revelations 19 speaks of his coming on a white horse
3. Only 3 of the 5 make reference to Jesus coming.
4. Even if all of these things were true its still not proof that the 3 woes are separate visions

IOW you did not prove your original argument with this argument because it itself is false therefore it is Weak and you did not prove you point or your orginial argument namely: that the 3 woes are 3 separate vision; can run concurrently; that the 3 woes all speak of Jesus coming. You didn't prove this with your argument. Now you seem to be saying to proved it but this is not the case the argument you used to prove your premise is a flawed one with many holes as i just mentioned.

[Tony P]

I agree with a few of your points (I believe Pre-trib is accurate, biblically). Where I disagree (somewhat slightly) is here, where you quote this passage. I believe it is a "2nd Coming to the earth passage" (His "RETURN"... ""when he will RETURN FROM the wedding"... THEN the meal, i.e. the wedding FEAST/SUPPER, aka the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom).

I agree with where you say that it will match what is written (meaning, things that occurred back then are also pictures of how prophecy will play out... for example, Rev19 would correlate with the time when "kings go out to battle" and kings were "crowned" [a specific day, per OT Scripture]).

Outside of the location of the wedding feast, I largely agree with you. The wedding feast takes place in heaven just as it is written in Rev 19 just before Jesus returns for the third time, the end of the third watch.

As for the "watches" (IN THE NIGHT), I don't believe any of those apply to our rapture (I'll get to that in a second)... the "IN THE NIGHT" passages refer to that specific time period leading UP TO His 2nd Coming to the earth (FOR the MK), that is, "the Day of the Lord [the long time period]" will ARRIVE "as a thief IN THE NIGHT" (the "in his time" of the "man of sin"). The Church which is His body (that's us) will be "changed/glorified" in what it says "in the twinkling of an eye," which refers to "the precise moment when one day turns into the next, when the sun is 8-degrees below the horizon, at sundown" [i.e. "DARK"... commencing the "DARK" portion of the Day of the Lord time period; all 'days' start the evening before--so that is our rapture, and 2Th2 says "that Day [the DOTL] will not be PRESENT if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST [our rapture FIRST]..." (the "man of sin" in IN the Day of the Lord ["DARK" portion], as he "is revealed" in its initial moment/1st Seal/1st "birth PANG [singular-1Th5:2-3]")].

Then, when it comes to the "IN THE NIGHT" portion, there are "watches" (in the night). I believe the Luke 12 passage is telling them about that (as you do--but I don't see it as lasting as long as you do, I see it lasting the "7-yrs/70th-Wk " [you may have seen my post stating the "he, he, he" of Dan9:27 is the "who, who, who" of 2Th2:3-8, his "beginning," his "middle," his "end"--same length of time--7-yrs in each of these 2 passages])...

so, when viewing "which watch" He will actually "come unto them" [see also Hosea 6:3 "come unto us/Israel"] (this is His 2nd Coming to the earth context, as I see it), it will actually be the "watch" in which (DURING His life and ministry) this was played out (in what we read in the gospel accounts). There was only one watch (described therein) where "He came [cometh / went] unto them"... and that is the one I see as being a picture of that future time (when He comes at His 2nd Coming to the earth).

"In the night" is not found in the Luke 12 passage. Perhaps an English interpreter added it to your version.

Luke 12:35 “Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; 36 and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. 37 Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. 38 And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

We are to watch "like" when the master returns from the wedding. That is the method in which we are to pay attention. The left behind folks will watch urgently, as should we today. Jesus will indeed return after gathering us to the wedding two more times. Notice only those watching in the first watch go to the feast. The second and third watch are also blessed, but they do not attend the feast as the feast takes place in heaven.

Also, there will be "a cry at midnight" saying "go ye out to meet Him" [before the aforementioned ] (I don't see this parable as referring to the rapture of "the Church which is His body" as you do, though... but of the time period leading UP TO His 2nd Coming to the earth, FOR the MK/wedding FEAST/SUPPER[Mt25:10nasb]/the kingdom of the heavens [on the earth, once He "returns" there]).

Hope that made some sense.

When we make the mistake of applying 1 Cor 15:52 to the rapture, plain parables lose their meaning. I do indeed believe the parable of the 10 virgins is about the rapture. Jesus gave the warning that the unprofitable servants will get cast out many times. The rapture won't save half the church that isn't doing what He told us to do.

[I didn't really address the OP, but in my studies of the chronology (which I've outlined briefly in past posts), I do see precisely 2520 days / 7-yrs (of 360-day-yrs) in that future time period commonly called the tribulation, which leads up to His 2nd Coming to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly MK/wedding FEAST-SUPPER/kingdom of the heavens]


Adding this, the "blessed" passages referring to their entrance (those entering) into the MK time period include: Dan12:12, Matt25:31-34, Lk12:36-37,38,40,42-44, Matt24:44-46, Rev 16:15, Rev19:9, etc...



As for the "7 years":

l------X------l------X------l [<---my basic depiction of the "7 yrs"... with the 2 "X's" referring to the beginning and end of the 2 Witnesses' 1260-day ministry [running concurrently with Trumpets 1-6]... and the middle line [approx] being the time of the 5th Trumpet/1st "Woe" unto the earth... the Seals come before the first "X" and the 7th Trumpet and 7 Vials at and after the last "X"... (In my chronology, each of these markings is placed at a significant calendar date derived from Scripture)]

The problem with the theory here is Revelation specifically tells us each woe is over before the next one starts. So, the 5th trumpet cannot occur during the 1260 days of the 2W.

Revelation 9:12 One woe is past. Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.

[Jesuslovesus]

The problem with the theory here is Revelation specifically tells us each woe is over before the next one starts. So, the 5th trumpet cannot occur during the 1260 days of the 2W.

Revelation 9:12 One woe is past. Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.

I'll just say that the start of the 2W testimony was never applied to the start of the 6th trumpet, there death and Resurrection is however clearly tied to the end of this time.