Additional Thoughts on Revelation 1: 1-3

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near." (Rev. 1: 1-3 nkjv)

In a previous article titled "What Is Meant by "Signified" in Rev. 1?" (here) I showed how many people, especially Amillennialists, argue that the word "signified" means information communicated through symbols and therefore the whole of the Book of Revelation is symbolic, having nothing or very little in it that is literal. That is a big mistake.

When a person reads in the Book of Exodus about the ten plagues, such as blood, frogs, gnats, flies, livestock pestilence, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and the death of the firstborn, does he think that these things are mere symbols? That there were no literal frogs, locusts, flies, etc.? I think that most Christians believe that these things were literal. That being so, we must wonder why many of those same Christians, when reading of similar plagues in the Book of Revelation, want to take them as mere symbols and not as literal events and things.

In this post I will begin to comment on what some other words in the opening words of the Book of Revelation mean, for there are indeed some misinterpretations of them also by many. First, we will look at what is meant by "things which must shortly come to pass." Second, we will look at what is meant by "for the time is at hand."

Many theologians of the Amillennial school, or Preterists, want to say that the words "must shortly come to pass" mean that those "things" occurred shortly after John recorded them, and therefore there is nothing left unfulfilled in the Book of Revelation. They also do the same when it comes to the words "for the time is near." However, both these phrases or clauses do not mean that all the things prophesied in the Book of Revelation were to take place immediately after John recorded it. Those of this school of thought often want to put an earlier date to the writing of the Book so that they can say that the prophecies of the Book were all fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple by the Roman general Titus in A.D. 70. Most scholars however contend that John wrote it about 95 A.D.

We must also keep in mind that 1) the Book of Revelation is a prophetic book, so the prologue says "the words of this prophecy" and "things that must come to pass," and 2) that it deals with the second coming of Christ, which is what the title of the book alludes to by the words "the revelation (apocalypse) of Jesus Christ." The revelation of Jesus Christ is his second coming, being his parousia, epiphany, or apocalypse. In II Thessalonians chapter two we have two of these words used to describe the coming apocalypse of Christ, which in the KJV are "the brightness of his coming." The word for "brightness" is "epiphania" and is elsewhere translated as "appearing." The word for "coming" is parousia and means coming or presence. We may therefore translate as "the appearing of his presence." In chapter one Paul wrote of this return of the Lord: "And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels." (vs. 7) The Greek word for "revealed" is apokalypsei. So, all three of these words are used to denote the return of Christ.

Shortly Come To Pass

The word "shortly" comes from the Greek word "tachei" and ἐν τάχει (en tachē) may be translated as "in or with haste" or "hastily" or "quickly" or "rapidly" or "speedily." In fact, "speedily" is how this word is translated in the following text, where Jesus said: "I tell you that he will avenge them speedily." (Luke 18: 8 kjv). Paul similarly to Revelation 1: 1 (kjv) says "And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly." (Rom. 16: 20)

How can John claim these events would happen “soon” or "shortly" occur when nearly two millennia have passed? Considerable discussion attends the meaning of ἐν τάχει. There are three interpretations of these words. First, the words require all of the events set forth in the book to have transpired within the lifetimes of John’s initial readers (the preterist interpretation). Second, the words denote events which may be in the distant future, but which transpire in rapid sequence once they begin. Third, the words denote closeness in time, but from God’s perspective. For myself, I am sure that the words mean what option two says. It implies that once the end-times events begin, they will unfold rapidly, rather than suggesting a short time from when the prophecy was written.

However, I do admit that the words themselves may carry the connotation that what is prophesied will take place in a short period of time starting from the time the prophecy was uttered. This is clearly the meaning of its use in these words of the apostle Paul: “I hope to come to you shortly” (I Tim. 3:14). Later in Revelation we have “things which must shortly take place” (Rev. 22: 6) and where Jesus says in the next verse “I am coming quickly” (ἔρχομαι ταχύ; erchomai tachy). The force of the adverb ταχύ (tachy) may therefore mean, “Whenever I come, I will come quickly,” in which case the stress is on the certainty of the coming. So we thus read: "And they departed quickly (tachy) from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word." (cf. Matt 28:8) So Jesus may have meant, “I am on my way and I intend to be there very soon.” It may also be a futuristic present tense.

The question then becomes whether the words "shortly come to pass" denote the manner in which events will transpire (rapidly) or the certainty and imminency attending the events. I firmly believe that ἐν τάχει in Revelation does not mean soon but swiftly, and indicates rapidity of action when once the action begins. We see this in the medical compound word tachycardia, which does not mean that the heart will beat soon, but that it is beating rapidly. We also get our word tachometer from the same Greek word we are studying. Automobiles have both a speedometer and a tachometer. The former measures the speed of the auto while the latter measures the revolutions per minute of the engine. Both measure the rapidity of motion when the action of moving starts. These terms are not descriptive of when the events will occur and our Lord will come, but rather, descriptive of the manner in which they will take place when they occur.

For The Time Is Near

So what is meant when the text says "for the time is near" or "the time is at hand"? The Greek word for "near" or "at hand" is "engys" and is used in various contexts and may signify what is near in a physical sense or what is near in the sense of time. Notice these verses where this word is used by our Lord in conjunction with his coming again and of the signs of that coming:

“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors!" (Matt. 24: 32-33 nkjv)

Once we begin to see the signs of the Lord's coming, we may say that the coming of the Lord is near. So Jesus said:

“And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; “men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. “Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. “Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.” (Luke 21: 25-28 nkjv)

"Draws near" is from the Greek word "engizō" which is from "engys." Notice that it is "when" the signs "begin to happen" that we may say that redemption is near. Paul said: "The night is far spent, the day is at hand" (Rom. 13: 12 kjv) where "at hand" is from the same Greek word. He also spoke of Christians "seeing the day approaching" (Heb. 10: 25) where "approaching" is the same Greek word. James says "the coming of the Lord draweth nigh" (James 5: 8 kjv) where the same Greek word is used. Peter says "the end of all things is at hand." (I Peter 4: 7)

So we may say of the words of Christ in Revelation 1: 3 that "the time is near," or "the time is drawing closer," or "the time is approaching," or "the time is not far away." They do not mean that the prophecies in the Apocalypse would occur immediately after John wrote down the things he saw and heard. The "end of all things" has not yet happened, nor have the prophetic events described in the Apocalypse.

Barnes in his commentary rightly observes:

"It would apply to any event whose beginning was soon to occur, though the end might be remote, for the series of events might stretch far into the future." 

By the judgment of Christ against the seven churches we may say that the beginning of the judgment of God has begun. After all, Peter wrote:

"For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome (or 'end') for those who do not obey the gospel of God?" (I Peter 4: 17 esv)

This is what we see in the Book of Revelation. Christ first, in connection with his coming Apocalypse and day of judgment, judges first the churches, or professing Christians, and then comes the judgment of the unsaved wicked.

We must also call the reader's attention to the fact that the word "time" in the words "the time is at hand" is from "kairos" and not "chronos." Kairos and Chronos are two distinct ancient Greek concepts of time. Chronos is quantitative, linear, and measurable (clock/calendar time), while Kairos is qualitative, representing the character of segments of time. Chronos focuses on the duration (how long), whereas Kairos focuses on the season or what is characteristic of certain periods of time. This is why chronos is better translated by "time" or "times" and kairos is better translated as "season" or ''seasons." Trench in his synonyms says:

"Chronos is simply time as such or the succession of moments...Olympiodorus remarked: "Chronos is the interval at which something is done; kairos is the time [kronos] suitable for the action. Thus chronos can be kairos, but kairos is not chronos..."

Where chronos is quantitative, kairos is qualitative. When I say "it is time to do so and so" I could mean because a certain date has been reached, or I could mean that circumstances for doing that thing are right. 

So, when Jesus says to John "for the time (kairos) is near," he meant that the things that will characterize the world prior to his return are near, and not that a certain date was near.

I wrote a series titled "The End Is Near" in 2012 in my Baptist Gadfly blog and had nine chapters. You can read the first (here) for November, and the others are in December. They also can be found in my blog where I am moving all my writings on eschatology. (See here)

 

What Is Meant by "Signified" in Rev. 1?

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near." (Rev. 1: 1-3 nkjv)

Many people, especially those who are Amillennial, are intent to take very little of the Book of Revelation literally, and want to affirm that it is nearly all figurative or symbolic, and say that "apocalyptic" writings have this characteristic as its genre. They will argue that the word "signified" in the above opening words of the Book affirms this. I totally reject that view and will show why. First, however, let me affirm what it means.

By "signifying" the things John saw and heard simply means that he saw and heard things and wrote them down. He saw literal things but when he wrote down what he saw, we are not ourselves seeing those things but descriptions of those things, much like when we watch a video of an occurrence. We are not watching the actual occurrence but a representation of that occurrence. The same is true of looking at a photograph of someone. When we look at the picture we are not seeing the actual person but a symbol or representation of that person. So, what John saw was like seeing motion pictures. Or, we may say that John was transported in time to see future events, and his description of those things are what it means that the angel signified them. He paints a portrait of future literal events, and the portrait signifies those events. 

The verb “signified” in Revelation 1:1 is translated from the Greek verb “semaino.” This Greek verb is also employed five other times throughout the New Testament, and in every one of those times it is translated by some form of the English verb “signify.” Here are those instances:

John 12:32-33 – “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.  This he said, signifying what death he should die.”

John 18:31-32 – “Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.”

John 21:18-19 – “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.”

Acts 11:28 – “And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.”

Acts 25:27 – “For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him.”

None of these instances denotes “a communication of information through symbolism.” Rather, in every one of these five cases, the verb means “a communication of information through description.” So, although the prophetic utterances of the book of the Revelation may indeed include some symbolism, the use of this verb in Revelation 1:1 does not mean that the prophetic scenes described are not literal. Jesus was literally "lifted up" on the cross, although those words could mean most anything. But they "signified" that he would die by crucifixion. The word "signified" may denote "this is what that means." 

The word "tree" is a way to signify an actual tree, the word itself not being the tree, but it does point to or describe a literal tree. The word "signature" is derived from the word "signify" and etymologically alludes to a person's "signet" or "seal." A signature is a representation, but what it represents is literal.

If I say "it rained cats and dogs" it is understood that this is not literal. However, there is a literal truth conveyed by that language. People know it means that it is pouring down rain, being a common idiom. Likewise, when people are called animal names, we know that those people are not literally the animals they are likened to, such as when it is said "he is a dog," or "he is a fox," etc. 

We are told that it was Christ's personal messenger (angel) who was given the task of bringing to John's eyes the scenes of the Apocalypse. "He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John."

Dr. J.A. Seiss, author of many good books, and of his famous book on the Apocalypse, said the following in his lecture on the opening words of the Apocalypse (emphasis mine):

"The proper explanation of the office of the angel is to be found in the words signified and saw. The word rendered signified, taken in connection with the fact that the things signified were matters of contemplation by means of the eyes, can denote nothing else than an actual picturing of those scenes—a making of them pass before the view the same as if they were really transpiring. The office of the angel, then, as I take it, was, to form the connection between John’s senses or imagination and the things which he was to describe, making to pass in review before him what was only afterwards to take place in fact. How this was done, I cannot say: but as the devil could take Jesus to a high mountain, and show him at one view “all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them,” I am sure that it falls sufficiently within the sphere of angelic natures thus to picture things to man; and that when commissioned of the Lord for the purpose, no good angel is wanting in ability to be the instrument in making John see whatever visions he describes in this book." 

The angel "signified" the scenes of the Apocalypse by giving to the apostle John a vision of coming events. Of course, Christ himself appeared to John and spoke to him, dictating to him what to write, including what to write to the angels of the seven churches of Asia Minor. They were "signified" to John by bringing him to see things with his eyes. So the text says of him: "who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw." In fact the words "saw" or "see" are frequent in the Apocalypse. Notice these examples:

“What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia" (vs. 11), And "Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw" (vs. 12), And, "when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead" (vs. 17) And, "Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this."

This is only what is in the first chapter of the Book. We see those same words many times throughout the Book. The things he saw were literal things. He actually did see beasts with seven heads, a woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet, a Lamb before heaven's throne, a rainbow round the throne, etc. Of course the beast with seven heads and the horns thereof are not literal, but they are well known symbols of what is literal. We know that the four living creatures in Nebuchadnezzar's dream represented four present and future world empires. The seven good cows and the seven ill cows in the dream of Joseph "signified" that there would be seven good years of fruitfulness and seven years of famine, which are literal events. Of course there are symbols, figures, similes, or "similitudes" to reveal literal things. So God said:

“I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.” (Hosea 12: 10 kjv)

"If there be a prophet among you, I, the Lord, will make Myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream." (Numb. 12: 6 kjv) 

A dream or vision given by God may make use of symbols, as we see in the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar in the Book of Daniel, but those symbols represent literal things. However, some dreams and visions may have no symbols, and some may have a mixture of the two. Those symbols signify literal events. 

So, beware of those who say that the word "signified" in the opening verses of the Book of Revelation means that the it is all symbolic, having nothing that is literal, for they will keep you from understanding that inspired Book. The new heavens and earth are literal. The New Jerusalem is literal. 

Further, the symbols in the Book of Revelation are such as are easily understood, so that what they signify is not left to the whim of the interpreter. The other parts of the Bible inform us of what those symbols stand for and represent. 

I believe that too many people, especially within certain denominations, take very little literally in the Book of Revelation, believing that what is literal in the Book of Revelation is non-literal, or symbolic or figurative. What then happens in far too many cases is that they 1) give up trying to figure out what each symbol or figure or vision in the Apocalypse represents and study it not, or else 2) to every Apocalyptic scene or occurrence in the Apocalypse they give wing to fanciful or far-fetched interpretations, giving their own private interpretations, or 3) put faith in what they are told to believe about the Book of Revelation by some pastor or teacher without testing those interpretations. 

Egypt's Judgments & Post Tribulation Redemption

The redemption and deliverance of the Jews out of Egyptian bondage is a type of that final redemption that is to come at the end of this age and it shows that the resurrection (redemption, rapture, translation) of believers will occur at the end of the great tribulation and its judgments.

The following citations are from "Post Tribulation Rapture V" (here).

Through Tribulation

"Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God."  (Acts 14: 22)

The idea of entering the kingdom of God through tribulation is what is vividly portrayed in the Apocalypse.  It is also in keeping with the prayer of Christ.

"I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil."  (John 17: 15)

The pre-tribber believes that it is the will of the Lord to take believers "out of the world" so that they be kept from the evil of the great tribulation, but this is just exactly what Christ prayed would not be.  It is the will of the Lord that believers be present during the coming great tribulation and that they be kept amidst it.  

This is seen in type in the old testament, in the judgments meted out on the land of Egypt just prior to the Exodus.  The elect of God were indeed taken out of Egypt, were delivered from the plagues of judgment, but it was not until the judgments had been sent upon the land.  If the pre-trib view were correct, we would expect that the Israelites would have been taken out of Egypt prior to the judgments being sent, but this is not what actually happened.  Further, the Lord's keeping of the Israelites from the evil of the judgments upon Egypt was not by taking them out, but by preserving them in the midst of it.

God is going to get his elect out of the Egypt of this world, but before that happens, he will send judgments of the Apocalypse upon Egypt (world) and will have his "two witnesses" then as he had Moses and Aaron as witnesses to Pharaoh and Egypt.

 

 

Elijah & John - Tribulation Prophets

The following is from a series I did a few years ago on my case for Elijah and John the apostle being the "two witnesses" of the Apocalypse. (here) The view that the apostle John is one of the two prophets is a minority view. That, however, should be no reason to discard it. I firmly believe the evidence for him being one of the two is immense, far more than is the evidence for Moses or Enoch. 

The Case For The Apostle John

There are several reasons why the Apostle John is to be identified as one of the two witness prophets of the Revelation prophecy. I believe a much stronger case can be made for John than can be made for either Enoch or Moses, or for any other. I believe that there is almost as much evidence for him as there was shown to be for Elijah the Tishbite. Further, it is surprising to me that this view is in fact a minority view, given the evidence for it.

I believe that we are living in the time of the end and that things are happening so rapidly. Soon Babylon will be rebuilt and become the economic capital of the world. Soon, the end time political realignment of the nations will be completed and we will have that long expected world government so much warned about in scripture, and which Antichrist will assume the lead over with the ten kings, mentioned by Daniel the prophet and by John in the Apocalypse.

We are living on the verge of the opening of the seals of the book, as described in the Apocalypse. We are on the verge of that time foretold by the Lord when

"there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken." (Luke 21:25-26 kjv)

You Must Prophesy Again

"And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter. And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings." (Rev. 10: 8-11 kjv)

These verses clearly demonstrate that John is to be one of the two prophet witnesses. The proof of it is right there in plain sight. The angel, who is doubtless Christ, says to John "you must prophesy again." And, such fresh prophesying will be "before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings." If the prophesying of the two witnesses does not fulfill this prophesy regarding John, then what is the meaning? What do those who reject John as being one of the two witnesses say about this clear prophesy concerning John's future? How and when did John prophesy "again"? Why is there widespread opposition from interpreting these words in the common ordinary sense? Why, even among those who promote the literal interpretation of the bible, and of the Book of Revelation, deviate from that rule and want to interpret the words "you must prophesy again" in a non-literal and uncommon way? Can it not be said of the two witnesses, if they be either Elijah, Enoch, or Moses, that they will "prophesy again"?

It seems so obvious that John will "prophesy again" as one of the two witness prophets that it is bewildering that so many miss it, or refuse to believe it. Why is it so hard to believe that the prophesying again of the apostle is literal and to be fulfilled in the time of the great tribulation? To accept one of the several explanations given by commentators, who do not believe John is one of the two prophets, requires one to understand the words and the language of the angelic prophesy concerning John in an abnormal manner.

To "prophesy" means to "utter" new revelation divinely given. How then can it be made to mean to write? Or, to simply preach or testify? Further, why deny what is intended by the word "again"? Whatever kind of "prophesying" John was to do in the future, after the angelic commissioning, it must be of the same kind as that which was done at the first. Further, how can anyone apply the prophesy to any other than to John? When the Angel says "you (John) must prophesy again," how can we say that by "you" that the Angel intends someone other than John?

Further, look at the context and the flow of the verses. "You must prophesy again...And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth." It was John who was told that he must prophesy again and it was he who was immediately given the rod by which to measure the temple. Besides answering the question - "when did John prophesy again," we must answer this one - "when did John measure the temple, altar, and the worshippers"? Doubtless he will do this during those 42 months.

To read the other arguments made for John and Elijah, read the whole short series.

What think ye?

 

The Two Witnesses of The Apocalypse are Persons

I am bewildered by how any serious bible student or teacher can say that the two witness prophets of Revelation chapter eleven are not individuals, but are symbols of groups. The same is true with the prophecies about the Antichrist, or man of sin, or the beast. Some try to say he is not an individual but a personification of a group. I was taught such idiocy when I was a Hardshell and yet even then I saw that it was not right. It is clear to any unbiased mind that the two witnesses are individuals. 

J.A. Seiss in his famous work titled "The Apocalypse" said this about the view that says the two witnesses of Revelation chapter eleven are not individual specific persons. (See here emphasis mine)

"These witnesses are persons. Primasius says, though somewhat equivocally, "The Two Witnesses represent the Two Testaments preached by the Christian Church to the world," and Bede, and Bishop Andrews, and Melchior, and Affelman, and Croly, and Wordsworth, and some others, have taken this view. But it is altogether a mistaken view, necessitated by the embarrassment occasioned by wrong conceptions of the Apocalypse, rejected by the overwhelming majority of interpreters ancient and modern, and utterly irreconcilable with the text. It is not true that the Old and New Testaments are preached to the world only 1260 days, or years, and then end their testimony;--that they are arrayed in sackcloth all the days they are preached;--that fire issues out of their mouths and kills those who will to injure them;--that there is no rain upon the earth during the days of their prophesying;--that they have power over waters to convert them into blood, or at will to smite the earth with plagues;--that they are capable of being killed by man;-or that indignity can be offered them, being dead, by refusing to allow them to be put into a sepulchre. Yet all these things are affirmed of these Witnesses. Nor is either the Old or the New Testament ever called a μαρτυρ (martyr - SG). Ten times do we find this word in the New Testament, and in every other place but this, no one questions that it denotes persons. In more than fifty places in the Old Testament, the corresponding Hebrew word denotes persons only. These Witnesses prophesy. This is the work of a person. More than one hundred times does this word (προψητευω) occur in the Bible, and never, except once by metonymy, but of persons. These Witnesses wear clothing of sackcloth, of which we read much in the Scriptures, but always of persons. They work miracles and execute judgments, but nothing of the sort is ever predicted of anything but personal agents. Not without the greatest violence to language and fact, therefore, can we regard these Witnesses as other than real persons. The conclusion may be very damaging to some men's cherished theories, but the integrity of God's word requires it, and it is impossible to escape it with any just regard to the laws of language and the nature of things."

 

These witnesses are individuals. No reader of the account, having no preconceived theory to defend, would ever think of taking them for bodies, or successions of people. All the early fathers, from whom we have any testimony on the subject, regarded them as two individual men. Two distinct and conspicuous bodies of witnesses for Christ, all prophesying in sackcloth through 1260 years, or even days, and all dying martyrs, as here represented, expositors have searched in vain to find in the history of the Christian ages. Such bodies of men, with such powers, and with such a history, have never existed. Modern writers have flattered themselves that they have found successions of people scattered through the middle ages, whom they would have us accept as The Two Witnesses of the text; but they have been obliged to purchase their conclusions at the expense of explaining away every distinct feature of the record, doing violence to the facts of history, and super-exalting almost every species of obscure and even heretical sects and sectarists as God's only acknowledged prophets. This is by far too great a cost at which to accept a theory, which, even if true, would be totally unworthy of a place in so solemn and momentous a book as this Apocalypse. Good and able men have satisfied themselves with it; but, on the same principles of interpretation, there is not a chapter in the Bible, nor a doctrine of our holy religion, which could not be totally explained away. By a happy inconsistency they do not so treat other portions of Scripture, or they would transmute the whole Revelation of God into uncertainty and emptiness. And whilst we give them credit for their learning, industry, and good intentions, and admit that a dim and imperfect correspondence to these Two Witnesses may perhaps be traced in the past history of the Church, yet, as we value the literal truth and certainty of the Divine Word, we cannot accept their expositions as exhaustive, or even as approximative to the revelation here given us."

I agree with this scholarly analysis completely.

Pre Trib & The 1000 Years

Pre Trib Premillenialists agree with all other Premillenialists that exactly 1000 years separate the first resurrection of the just from the second resurrection of the unjust, as Rev. 20 says. I say they "agree" but do they really? Can they say this and be consistent? No, they cannot. Here is why.

If the rapture comes seven years before the beginning of the Millennium, then the resurrection of the just, or "first resurrection," comes not 1000 years, but 1007 years, before that of the second resurrection. Don't you see? The rapture has to take place at the end of this age, which point in time is also when the Millennium begins. Thus, to put exactly 1000 years between the resurrection of the just and the unjust uproots the pre trib rapture view.

Consider also the fact that Jesus and the scriptures put the resurrection of the righteous "at the last day." But, if it occurs seven years before the last day, as the pre trib view affirms, then it is not the last day.

Consider also the fact that all the righteous are resurrected and raptured at the same time. But, no pre trib advocate affirms this. They affirm that some are saved after the rapture and resurrection, in the seven year tribulation period, and therefore these must undergo a translation and resurrection separate from the others. Thus, they deny that all are resurrected and translated at the same time.

Tribulation Period - 7 Yrs. Or More?

It is commonly believed today by Christians that the events of the Apocalypse, occurring under the opening of the seven seals, takes place within a predestined time period of seven years. This belief is not based upon anything stated in the Book of Revelation, for as we will see, the events that transpire on earth during events connected with the seals take in far more than seven years. This is so obvious that one wonders why a seven year limit for those events is imposed upon the Apocalypse record.

Those who espouse a time period of seven years for the events of the seals do so because they think the seventieth week of Daniel's prophecy (Dan. 9: 24-27) is to be imposed upon the timeline of events in the Apocalypse. But, there is absolutely no warrant for doing this, and the fact that it has been done has created much confusion and contradiction.

More Than Seven Years

Revelation's time line takes in more than seven years. There is not a single verse from Revelation that says there will be a seven year tribulation period. Although there are lots of sevens in Revelation (the number appears more than fifty times), there is no mention of seven years. There are two forty-two-month periods (11:2; 13:5), two 1,260-day periods (11:3; 12:6), and one “a time and times and half a time” (12:14), each adding up to three and one-half years. If they are added up, the result is seventeen and one-half years. This is besides those references to "five months," "a year, a month, and a day," and also excludes all those events that occur and in which no time period is given for their occurrence.

In the Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible the division is explained this way: “John in Revelation divides [the Tribulation] into two periods of three and one-half years each or 1,260 days each, a total of seven years.” 

But where in Revelation does it say this? Consider the fact that all the three and a half year periods appear more than halfway through Revelation.

Now, let me give a time line up to the sounding of the seventh trumpet of the seventh seal.

First Seal (white horse)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it

Second Seal (red horse)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it
- there is worldwide civil war and no peace (nothing but conflict) nor safety
- assume that this period encompasses months, perhaps years, but at least weeks rather than days

Third Seal (black horse)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it
- Scarcity and famine
- world's food supply is rationed
- assume that this period encompasses months, perhaps years, but at least weeks rather than days

Fourth Seal (pale horse)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it
- death everywhere by famine, conflict, pestilence
- assume that this period encompasses months, perhaps years, but at least weeks rather than days

Fifth Seal (activities around the altar in heaven)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it
- petitions for justice and vengeance by the martyrs and persecuted ones
- the martyrs in heaven are told to "rest yet for a little season"
- we cannot determine exactly how much time is calculated therein

Sixth Seal (earthquake)

- no indication of a time period for the events connected with it

- sealing of 144,000
- assembling and equipping of saints and angels in heaven
- the catastrophes connected with this seal's opening show that it must encompass weeks, if not months and years

No indication for how much time the events of the first six seals takes.

Seventh Seal (destruction of vegetation)

- seven trumpet angels prepare to sound
- activity around heaven's altar by departed saints

- 1st trumpet sounds and brings destruction of vegetation by fiery hail
- no indication of a time period for the events
- assume months or weeks

- 2nd trumpet sounds and brings destruction of 1/3rd sea creatures and ships by turning water to blood
- no indication of a time period for the events
- can assume weeks or months

- 3rd trumpet sounds and brings wormwood (bitter or poisonous) toxins to rivers, streams, fountains and causing widespread death
- no indication of a time period for the events
- assume months or weeks

- 4th trumpet sounds and brings abnormal darkness over earth via sun, moon, and stars
- no indication of a time period for the events
- assume months or weeks

No indication for how much time the events of the first four trumpeters takes.

- 5th trumpet sounds and brings opening of the bottomless pit and release of infernal locusts
- the torment upon unbelievers by the locusts goes "five months"
- "One woe is past; and, behold, there come two woes more hereafter"

- 6th trumpet sounds and brings the freeing of the four angels and their hellish armies from Euphrates River imprisonment.
- "a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men" (13 months)
- the angel with the rainbow head covering, feet of brass, and face as the sun, sets his foot on land and sea and makes announcement
- the two witnesses appear in Jerusalem and begin their mission of judgment
- the period of the two witnesses is given as 1260 days (42 months)
- the period when the Gentiles are occupying Jerusalem is 42 months
- these periods seem to be the same time period
- killed by the Antichrist
- "the second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe comes quickly"
- how much time then under the 6th trumpet?
- it seems clear that the 13 months precedes the 42 months, and even if the 42 month periods run concurrently, there still is a total of 55 months.

- 7th trumpet sounds and begins with announcements among heaven's grand assize
- "And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth"
- battle between the heavenly woman and her seed and the Dragon and his seed envisioned
- the woman in her seed are protected for 1260 days and as "time, times, and half a time" (42 months)
- battle in the heavens between Michael and his angels and the Devil and his angels
- the victory of Michael and the casting down of the Devil to the earth
- battle between saints on earth with the beast's military police
- Antichrist comes to power and "continues 42 months" along with the false prophet
- it is probable that the 1260 days or the woman's protection is simultaneous with the 42 months of the beast's reign of terror
- Lamb appears on Mt. Zion with the 144,000
- the appearance of Christ in the clouds preparing to harvest
- the appearance of the seven plague angels

Allowing no time to be allotted for what happens during the opening of the first six seals, and allotting no time for the sounding of the first four trumpets of the seventh seal, there is still more than seven years time involved in the events occurring under the sounding of the 5th, 6th, and 7th trumpets of the seventh seal. We begin with the stated "five months" under the 5th trumpet. Next, under the 6th trumpet, we have three time periods given. First, the 13 months and a day and hour, second, two references to 42 months, one for the prophesying of the two witnesses, and one for the reign of the Antichrist. It is clear that the 42 month reign of Antichrist begins with his killing of the two witnesses. Thus, the 42 month period of the witnessing is followed by the 42 month period of the beast's reign. This all being so, we have but to add 13 months + 5 months + 42 months + 42 months to get 102 months (eight years and six months)! And that excludes so many time periods not stated.

So, there is without a doubt more than seven years involved in the timeline of events for the opening of the seals, from Rev. 6 through Rev. 19.