Dr. Rich, Ellen G. White is not Jezebel. I do not even know who would say such a thing. Jezebel is the same as the woman who rides the beast in Revelation 17. What the letter to Thyatira says about Jezebel foretells the test that will come to the faithful still in the Roman Catholic Church, as the Papal hierarchy--which is really a pagan intrusion into the church--assumes political control over the nations of Europe. The text also states that all the churches will learn a lesson from this experience of the Thyatiran church. So if the letter to Ephesus represented the church hundreds of years before the Thyatiran church was to come on the scene--as has been commonly assumed--how could Ephesus learn such a lesson from an experience that was hundreds of years in the future?

If you are talking about my book, I only touched briefly on the seven churches. Though once you accept that Revelation chapters 4 and 5 portray the Judgment, the same as foretold in Daniel 7, then it is logical to conclude that the seven churches must apply primarily to the complete scope of Christendom just as the churches are about to enter the Judgment of the Living. I mention in my book some arguments for this from the text. (Such as what is stated in Revelation 3:10.) This would make perfect sense of Rev. 4:1, because the next thing after preparing for the Judgment is the Judgment.

Dr. Edwin Reynolds, editor of the Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, said to me in an email on June 25, 2008: "Furthermore, no serious SDA scholarship within the past 30 years at least would see a judgment scene in Rev 4-5."

Apparently he was unaware of the fact that Dr. Frank W. Hardy, and Dr. Alberto R. Treiyer (head of the Biblical Research Institute), both are in print with the position that Rev. 4-5 DOES portray "a judgment scene." In fact, Dr. Treiyer sets this forth in his book titled: The Final Crisis in Revelation 4-5, copyrighted in 1998.

The traditional, majority viewpoint has long been that Rev. 4-5 portrays the Inauguration of Christ shortly after His Ascension. But the view that it portrays the Judgment has just as long been a minority viewpoint among SDA Bible students and scholars. I hope that my book, by presenting the really strong arguments for the minority viewpoint and against the majority viewpoint, will help this minority viewpoint to become the new majority viewpoint among us, as it truly deserves to be, as a matter of sound scholarship.

This sort of thing has happened before, with the identity of the King of the North in Daniel 11:40-45. The long-time majority view, popularized by Uriah Smith, was that it represented Turkey. But James White maintained that it represented the Papacy. In recent decades, Smith's interpretation has been falling into disfavor, and more and more SDA Bible students and scholars are coming around to the James White view (which basically I agree with as well, and expand upon in my book). This is probably the majority view, now.

If you note from the Ellen G. White quotes I cited in my first post in this thread, she definitely stated that new light from Daniel and Revelation is yet to come, and is going to have a profound effect upon the church. That is what I am hoping for. But in order for us to receive new light, we may have to concede that we were in error about some views we have been holding.

True Ron.

You know Ron I have heard that before, not sure where. But how anyone can come up with that makes no sense.

pk

"makes no sense"! Your opinion of course.....mel

Ron,

Revelation 4 and 5 are not the Judgment as you said in your post. EGW in the Great Controversy makes this clear:
"The holy places of the sanctuary in heaven are represented by the two apartments in the sanctuary on earth. As in vision the apostle John was granted a view of the temple of God in heaven, he beheld there 'seven lamps of fire burning before the throne.' Revelation 4:5. He saw an angel 'having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.' Revelation 8:3. Here the prophet was permitted to behold the first apartment of the sanctuary in heaven; and he saw there the 'seven lamps of fire" and "the golden altar,' represented by the golden candlestick and the altar of incense in the sanctuary on earth." GC, p. 414.
If it is in the Holy Place, it is not the Judgment.

Ron,

Another thought from Jon Paulien on the issue of Revelation 4 and 5, which I ran across recently when studying the Revelation, is very interesting:
"Most striking of all, however, is the fact that John studiously avoids the language of judgment in this throne scene. In the Greek language judgment is usually expressed by the nouns krisis and krima, and the verb krino. As the references indicate, John is quite familiar with the language of judgment but deliberately avoids using it in the first half of the book of Revelation. The seeming exception (6:10) is not a description of the judgment, but a call for the judgment to begin... the language of judgment in Revelation is reserved for descriptions of end-time events (Rev. 12-20)." DARCOM, Symposium on Revelation - Book I, p. 210.
Jon is logical here since it is obvious that the main discussion of judgment takes place when "the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament." Revelation 11:19. The work of judgment takes place when the Most Holy place is opened.

Ron,

If there are others who have taught that Revelation 4 and 5 are talking about the judgment, then what is the genuine new light to which you refer? What about Daniel 12, what is new light there? I wonder if you have decided like so many writers, which I have seen over the past dozen years of so, who have decided to interpret the time periods in Daniel 12 as literal days instead of years?
I am not really interested in the futurist agenda or any type of time setting. What can you tell me that would make me want to purchase your work?

Hmm. Wonder what Jon is up to here?


og

Paulien is a great theologian , author, teacher and speaker. I think we can learn much from his perspectives. A true man of God. God has richly blessed him. He is SO valuable to the church.

I agree that Jon Paulien is a very good theologian, and he is clearly logical. He has examined the Greek here and makes a lot of sense. The book of Revelation is based around the tent of the tabernacle of the Jewish sanctuary. The first three major sections of the book are events that happen on earth while our high priest is ministering in the Holy place in heaven. They each have seven sequencial divisions: seven churches, seven seals, and seven trumpets. They all cover the same period of time, from the time Jesus ascended to heaven until He finishes His work there.
The last major section of the book begins, "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament..." Revelation 11:19. This section of the Revelation does not have seven sequencial divisions like the others. It has many smaller simultaneous sections which focus mainly upon the time of the judgment after 1844; the last period of earth's history. The door to the Most Holy place in heaven was not open to the view of John before Revelation 11:19. Hence Revelation 4 and 5 cannot be a discription of the judgment.