It seems to me that the fact that toward the end of Rev. 11 it says that the 2nd woe is past, it seems to me that this fact makes Rev. 10 and most of 11 be part of the 6th trumpet. Also, in Rev. 10, it says that "in the days of the 7th angel," implying that the first 6 trumpets had already blown.

Since the opening of the little book in Rev. 10 only occurs at the end of the 1260 days of Daniel 12, this suggests that the first six trumpets begin before the end of the 1260 days.

I'm summarizing a lot, so if it doesn't make sense, let me know.

I agree with you that Jerusalem in Lk. 21:24 is the church. The passage parallels Rev. 11:2, and on that verse EGW says "Jerusalem" means the church.

If the 1st trumpet refers to Alaric, then it begins before the 1260 days begin. If the first four trumpets refer to the removal of he (pagan Rome turned Catholic as of Theodosius' reign) who was in the way of the rise of the papacy (2 Th. 2:7), then it would have to be that way. Only after the removal of pagan Rome turned Catholic could the papacy arise to power.

I look at the assault on literal Jerusalem as being a type of the assault on the medieval church. I can't see how it can represent also the final assault on God's people. In 70 AD and 538 AD the sanctuary was destroyed or obscured. In the last days it is to be restored to its rightful place never to be destroyed again. The final assault might be better likened to the destruction of ancient Babylon, not Jerusalem. True, there was a signal to leave Jerusalem, and there will be a signal for us to leave the cities, but folk were warned in the OT to leave ancient babylon too before it was destroyed.

The time of trouble will be upon the world. The tribulation was upon the church.

posted by Bob:

It seems to me that the fact that toward the end of Rev. 11 it says that the 2nd woe is past, it seems to me that this fact makes Rev. 10 and most of 11 be part of the 6th trumpet. Also, in Rev. 10, it says that "in the days of the 7th angel," implying that the first 6 trumpets had already blown.
******************

Exellent point! This fact, to me, is incontrovertible! The French Revolution fulfilled part of the sixth trumpet, the second woe. The French general inflicted a deadly wound to the papacy. "The second woe is past." Why do we want to apply to the future what is already in the past?

Bob: did you ever notice that the sixth trumpet dried up 1/3 of the River Euphrates whereas the sixth plague will completely dry it up! Does this not show that the sixth trumpet and the sixth plague are not one and the same thing?

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Bob:
I suppose I get hung up on the destruction of Jerusalem because it starts the Great Controversy. Whether it is a portion of the trumpets I do not know. Still pondering that one.

In reference to the temple in Jerusalem. I believe that the temple in Jerusalem became "babylonish" when they rejected Jesus, the true temple, and He said that their house had become desolate. Still he granted them 3.5 more years before the 70 week prophecy had ended. Amazing story and only partially grasped even by God's people today.

Thank you for your willingness to dialogue at this slow pace. I am having trouble getting computer time.

Adventbeliever,

Probably the 6th trumpet isn't a good one for your point, since it doesn't mention 1/3 of the river drying up there. But the 4th would be a good one. 1/3 of the sun smitten doesn't equate with the sun scorching men with great heat.

Greg,

I guess I'll let you make the next comment rather than me getting repetitive.

Like I mentioned in the other related thread that I just brought forward, I want to review this again. What do you all think. Is there any room to reapply this detailed and long prophecy to our day and the future?

Of course there is room to apply it the first time to the present and future, since the prophecy is not quite finished yet. The part that applies to today and the future is the very last part of chapter 11.

Other than that, I don't see how we can go that route.

quote:

---

Rev. 8:12 And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.

---

A 1/3 part of the sun is smitten. The day doesn't shine for a 1/3 part of it. A 1/3 part of the day is roughly 4 hours. Thus the smiting of a 1/3 of the sun results in 4 hours less daylight per day.

I have yet to see any interpretation other than the historicist one that makes sense out of that verse without altering it to say what it does not say.