Leading a Revelation study

Sorry for any extra work my writing skills do suffer.

Yes he is much better at helping us to understand his signified tongue . Nothing needs to be added to His word. we offer what we think he is teaching us. One is our Master teacher in heaven

The prescription to mix with faith so that we can receive the hidden signified gospel understanding. It is a reflection of Hebrew 4:1 4 showing us we can rest when yoked with Christ our sabbath. The gospel rest .

We do not wrestles against flesh and blood the temporal things seen and neither or do we derive any power from the corrupted flesh and blood.

Revelation 1;1 reveals the interpreting tool or prescription needed to rightly divide the parables. Like the Revelation 20
parable. Using the temporal to signify the eternal vison not seen. (2 Corinthians 4:18) The vision of faith the golden measure

.Many say God is a man popular in many Christian circles. . A creature as us having a beginning. God is not a man and neither is there a fleshly infallible teacher set between God not seen and man seen

If you are teaching the lesson, you should be the most studied person in the room. If you’re not it won’t take long for them to see that.

There's a really simple solution to that: take a class.

Quote any Christians who says this. Even one person. Actual quotations, not assertions.

Actual quotations, not assertions of what? God is not a man and neither is there a Good Master set between God not seen and man seen? Only one is good God. the teaching Master as Lord.

Yes teacher.. wish I had you in fifth grade English. Four hardest years of my life.

Kind of hard to teach older dogs tricks . Thanks

Actual quotations of real human beings who claim that God is a man, not your own assertions about what some (unnamed) people believe. Do you have that much trouble understanding what is requested of you?

You do realize that studying Revelation before you lead Revelation is a lesson straight from Captain Obvious, right?

Quick test: when does Jesus return?

I will take that as a no.

Way to avoid the question. I wouldn’t recommend this approach while teaching.

Nowhere in Scripture are we told to study false religions or prophets.
In fact we are told the opposite.

I understand the thinking behind studying them, but that is human logic. Not Scriptural at all.

Oh, and Premillennialism is unBiblical. Start your study there!

The most important thing about The Revelation of Jesus Christ is not all the "isms" & "ists" and learning what THEY teach about it.
There are so many rabbit holes. The most important thing is the Revelation points us back to research all the prophets seriously.
So many Christians seem to disregard the "Old" Testament, relegating those books to moral lessons & history only.
Bible study shouldn't be overly reliant on New Testament teachings to the exclusion of the foundational books.

I honestly think that one of the reasons God put The Revelation book at the end of the collection was to force Gentile New Covenant believers to examine the prophetic books of scripture as a whole and in detail.

Where in the Bible are told not to study false religions? Worship false gods and idols yes, but I thought attaining knowledge was always beneficial.

Also, if Christ does not physically return and defeat our enemies then reign until the next (final) uprising (thousand years), CLEARLY written in scripture, then what is the Bible actually describing.....according to you?

I think you got me mistaken for someone else. I believe exactly what you just wrote.

For myself, I find it easier to start at the last section of Revelation because it seems to offer a much more literal view and description. I find that most of the frustration and argument stems from trying to interpret the symbolism-so-called in the earlier sections of Revelations.

Premillennialism is what I described and what you called unBiblical, so maybe you used the wrong term? Pretribulation Rapture maybe?

You are correct sir. I’m sorry. I did get the verbiage wrong. Thanks for pointing that out in a respectful way.

I do not contest that. Certainly, the isms and ists are not the MOST important thing, and drawing God's word out of God's Word is. But, like I said in my analogy about studying false religions (and that is an ANALOGY, people...), it does not mean we have to exclude study of the isms and ists altogether. We have a 1900-year history of Christians reading the same book we are. And premillennialism is not even a false religion--it is simply an interpretation of Revelation which some believe is an incorrect one. Simply to shut out what many God-fearing Christians studied before us, I do not think is in God's design. It is about your relationship between you and the Father, but it is not ONLY about your relationship between you and the Father.

Related to what you said in the last part, I'm beginning to believe that one of the reasons Revelation is there (and last in the canon) is related to ecclesiology. The way we interact as believers relating to Revelation is a reflection on the state of the Church. Group study of Revelation reveals in us our pride and arrogance in our attitudes, our methods of resolving conflict (or our failure to) with other believers, our priorities of essential versus non-essential beliefs, and our ability simply to communicate. And it challenges us to improve on where we fall short. People have this idea that Revelation is primarily a crystal ball--a secret decoder ring--into the future. But Jesus has so much bigger ideas in mind.

I'm all for agreeing to disagree on certain matters, but I wonder...

Let's say you have 20 people come to your class, each having only a cursory grasp of Revelation (never really having studied it themselves before), and so they are COMING because they WANT TO KNOW "what it MEANS" and have questions about it... and you present "The 10 Views of Revelation" (covering one view per week--reading from the authors and teachers of said viewpoints, each week), thusly:

1) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

2) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

3) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

4) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

5) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

6) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

7) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

8) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

9) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

10) [such and such teacher says it means] ____________

[insert a different "viewpoint" into each of the above "blanks"]



By the end of your class, will you feel the "class" has been a success if those having COME TO ATTEND, come away with "10 different views" (2 each, for the 10 different viewpoints)?


And they feel they are then prepared to teach others also, each of those "10 Views" separately (the one particular viewpoint each of them thought sounded best)... like, in your church, for the next go-round? Do you feel that would be considered a success, in your estimation?



By the way, I don't believe it's a bad thing to explain what the other viewpoints state and explain WHY they come to those conclusions, I just don't see how it would be productive to leave it at that and not supply the reasons why one view is far and above the rest, because not all of them can be true, and the last thing you'd want is for the result of the class be "even further confusion," IMO.



[comparing this to your analogy of covering the Subject of "religions / religious viewpoints"... there's an ultimate goal and purpose of showing which viewpoint is CORRECT, right? You're not satisfied with merely exposing people to the various "religions" to no PURPOSE (just letting them randomly pick Buddhism, for themselves), right? You have an ultimate OBJECTIVE: ascertaining TRUTH, right?]

Turns out the Gordon Fee book is a free audiobook, so no feeding the Amazon juggernaut there.

Also, Gordon Fee has a book on Revelation. I like the path this is going.