Question on source - Paul's testimony of heavenly visit

[reformed_baptist]

First off - Paul himself claims to be speaking of another man.

Is he really?

I presume this is based on v5 yes?

However reading v5 in that way is a failure to follow Paul's argument - if he is speaking about anyone other then himself then his words are pointless - they detract from the flow of his argument rather then add to it.

So, why does he address his own experiences in the third person?

Well, maybe it is the rhetorical device of pseudonymity in apocalyptic writings - as a jew trained in the conservative school of Gamaliel that would have been part of his training.

The describe the event in the third person might derive from the very nature of the event itself - it was like he was watching himself experience it - consider what he says about not knowing if it was in the body or out of the body - v2.

Or maybe because of the way his opponents were boasting he decided to step away from such actions as he spoke about his own spiritual experiences. When we consider v1 we see Paul saying, 'it isn't helpful to boast, therefore I will talk about vision that I have had instead' (or at least that seems to be the best sense we can make of his words)

Second - I believe Paul.

On the surface that sounds very pious - but actually it isn't - it is careless!

You seem to be suggesting that those who disagree with you do not believe Paul.

Now, personally it is my opinion that the person who believes Paul would take the time to read what Paul has said and take the time to meaningfully interact with what others have said in relation to Paul.

Why is it, I wonder, that the Genevan school of thought that produced the bible translation you so highly esteem believed this was Paul speaking about himself?

As to who it was Paul was referencing - John the apostle is the only one ever spoken of in the NT as doing such.

Where does the NT speak of this happening to John?

I can only assume you are referring to John's experiences that he recounts in the book of Revelation, can you point me where he describes his experience as being the one Paul describes - there is no reference to 'the third heaven' in Revelation, and as far as I can see whilst John gets to look into heaven he always seem to be outside of heaven - looking in (Rev 19:11 etc) and he is hearing voices coming from heaven (Rev 10:4) - his experience is not the same as Paul describes.

So, it isn't John, and if Paul isn't speaking about himself he is wasting ink and taking away from the flow of his argument against the false apostles in the church at Corinth.

 

[reformed_baptist]

Y
I do not see your view that John wrote the book of Revelation while on Patmos. He COULD have, but there is no scriptural proof he DID.

Really, what about Rev 1:9

I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. (NKJ)

Is the testimony of John, written in the book of Revelation itself, not scriptural proof of John's location when he received the Revelation that he records?

 

[Genevanpreacher]

Really, what about Rev 1:9

I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. (NKJ)

Is the testimony of John, written in the book of Revelation itself, not scriptural proof of John's location when he received the Revelation that he records?

All that says is he was there during the vision - not writing it there.

 

[reformed_baptist]

All that says is he was there during the vision - not writing it there.

Really, so when the Lord Jesus Christ says: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last," and1, "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia2: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea." (Rev 1:11 NKJ)

John thought to himself, 'no I won't do that - I will write it when I want to' - in fact by your thinking he had already written it as in the OP you place the dating of Revelation at 'about ad42' which is whilst John was still in Jerusalem before the beheading of James (Acts 12:2). My friend, your theory, not only ignores the witness of John in the book of Revelation - it turns the hole biblical chronolgy upside down and on it's head.

You are asking us to believe that John wrote a book and sent it to churches that were not even planted yet! Why would the Lord Jesus Christ tell him to do that?

Nor am I ignorant of the internet apologist device being put into practice here. Namely that you are routinely ignored the weight of evidence that is presented and refusing to address all the points being made but instead you are seeking to find one little point you can pick up on in the hope that the audience will not notice that weightier matters have been ignored

Why, for example, do you reject what those who provided you with the genevan bible clearly believed to be the case in regards to 2 Cor 12.

And can you establish from the book of Revelation that John's experience matches that experience that Paul describes - I have to be honest - I find your lack of response to this particular point most telling.

Now, above and beyond what I have already said, I have one more point to make - why did Paul receive the thorn in the flesh is he wasn't the one who experienced this vision?

2 Corinthians 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. 8 Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness." Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ's sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong. (2Co 12:7 NKJ)

So, in your thinking, John received the vision (which he has already written about whilst in Jerusalem back in AD42 and sent to churches that didn't exist) and Paul is the one who has to endure the thorn in the flesh that stops him becoming 'big headed' about this vision - why would Paul get a 'big head' about something that happened to John?

Forgive me, my friend, to me it sounds like utter nonsense and the lack of meaningful response and interaction with what I (and others) have written does nothing to establish the credibility of what you posit.

 

[John of Japan]

You really see Paul calling himself one he could "rejoice in" but not "rejoice in" at the same time?

Why would he say it that way if he were just talking about himself?

"Of such a man will I rejoice: of my self will I not rejoice"

He is obviously speaking of another man I believe is John the Apostle.

Sorry, I am going with Paul's own words.

Paul was using irony.

 

[John of Japan]

Of such a man will I rejoice: of my self will I not rejoice, except it be of mine infirmities. For though I would rejoice, I should not be a fool: for I will say the truth, but I refrain, lest any man should think of me above that he seeth in me, or that he heareth of me. And lest I should be exalted out of measure through the abundance of revelations, there was given unto me a prick in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, because I should not be exalted out of measure."

What translation is this? The Greek word is not the word for "rejoice" (xairo), but kauxaomai, "I boast." At any rate, since it says "except..." (EI MH), it could be referring to Paul in the Greek.

 

[John of Japan]

I do not see your view that John wrote the book of Revelation while on Patmos. He COULD have, but there is no scriptural proof he DID.

What would constitute proof to you?

Rev. 1:9--"I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ."

 

[tyndale1946]

What would constitute proof to you?

Rev. 1:9--"I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ."

It was Paul!... Is Paul!... And always will be Paul!... All the well know Bible commentators I've read disagree with you... Gill, Henry, Strong, ect... ect... ect... and it looks like all the brethren on the BB do to... You want to believe it is John that is your own private interpretation... Scripture always interprets scripture you just need to believe it what it says!... Brother Glen

 

[John of Japan]

It was Paul!... Is Paul!... And always will be Paul!... All the well know Bible commentators I've read disagree with you... Gill, Henry, Strong, ect... ect... ect... and it looks like all the brethren on the BB do to... You want to believe it is John that is your own private interpretation... Scripture always interprets scripture you just need to believe it what it says!... Brother Glen

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. "It was Paul" who did what?

If you mean that John did not write the Revelation, may I suggest that you need new sources? Gill and Henry are old, old commentaries that you can get in most software packages for free. (Strong's is not a commentary.) Scholars ignore them. Furthermore, their theology is not mine. So frankly, I'm not a bit impressed that Gill and Henry disagree with me. I'll just agree with Walvoord, A. T. Robertson, Alan Johnson, and other modern commentators.

I'll just go with what the Scripture says, that John received the Revelation on Patmos. It would be extremely strange if he didn't write it down then.

 

[tyndale1946]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. "It was Paul" who did what?

If you mean that John did not write the Revelation, may I suggest that you need new sources? Gill and Henry are old, old commentaries that you can get in most software packages for free. (Strong's is not a commentary.) Scholars ignore them. Furthermore, their theology is not mine. So frankly, I'm not a bit impressed that Gill and Henry disagree with me. I'll just agree with Walvoord, A. T. Robertson, Alan Johnson, and other modern commentators.

I'll just go with what the Scripture says, that John received the Revelation on Patmos. It would be extremely strange if he didn't write it down then.

I'll was not replying to you john of Japan... Sorry if you got that interpretation, I apologize... I was responding to the OP not what you said... Forgive me!... I feel totally embrassed... Brother Glen

 

[TCassidy]

[Edited due to Glen's correction.]

 

[tyndale1946]

[Edited due to Glen's correction.]

If I implied that I'm sorry... I made a mistake and am totally embarrassed and will admit it to all... But you know me and my postings and how long I've been on the BB... I NEVER, EVER, EVER, believed Paul wrote Revelation... I just made a STUPID posting error... Maybe I should go hide under a rock!... There isn't a emicon on here to say how I feel right NOW!... Maybe coming back was a mistake?... Brother Glen

 

[JonShaff]

If I implied that I'm sorry... I made a mistake and am totally embarrassed and will admit it to all... But you know me and my postings and how long I've been on the BB... I NEVER, EVER, EVER, believed Paul wrote Revelation... I just made a STUPID posting error... Maybe I should go hide under a rock!... There isn't a emicon on here to say how I feel right NOW!... Maybe coming back was a mistake?... Brother Glen

don't worry about it brother, it's not a big deal. it was cleared up.

 

[TCassidy]

Maybe I should go hide under a rock!

You stay out from under my rock! It's getting way to crowded under here!

 

[John of Japan]

I'll was not replying to you john of Japan... Sorry if you got that interpretation, I apologize... I was responding to the OP not what you said... Forgive me!... I feel totally embrassed... Brother Glen

That's quite all right, brother.

 

[Genevanpreacher]

First off - I never said John didn't write Revelation while ON Patmos - the scriptures just do not say he did.

Second - the 1560 Geneva Bible I use does not state that Paul was speaking of himself in the 12 chapter of 2 Corinthians in any of the notes - although the note for "in Christ" in verse 2 says "That is, a Christian" - pointing out that the man Paul was speaking of was a Christian, confirming what I think, that Paul was indeed speaking of another man and not himself. Even the 1599 Tomson NT of the Geneva Bible calls verse 1 a "preface" verse to Pauls statement.

Thirdly - Paul was comparing the great thing one man had been blessed by God to experience, with what he was going to experience in the future, to which God gave him that "prick" to keep him humble. Nothing else.

As for ALL the commentators opinions that Paul was speaking of himself as the one who went to the third heaven, and ALL the brethren on BB that also think that?

I can only wonder why. I have read the scriptures for 30 years this past January 11th, and I still read them the same when it comes to this verse. Paul was speaking of himself in verse 1, and in verses 2-5a he was speaking of some other man who had a different 'mission' than Paul, and verses 5b-10 Paul returned to speaking about himself.

As for the timing of John and his writing of Revelation - in the Dickson Analytical Study Bible where the book of John starts, there is an interesting history on John.

"In the reign of Domitian John was banished to Patmos and afterwards returned to Ephesus. He lived in that city to an extreme old age, the last of the twelve Apostles. It is generally held that he wrote his gospel in that city and not long before his death, and as indicated by Clement, at the request of Christian friends."

Notice "afterwards...to an extreme old age"?

He had plenty of time after Patmos to still write about what happened on Patmos, and still does not indicate disobedience in doing what God told him to do in writing Revelation.

I like to think fellas, not just go along with the crowd of teachers who all say the same thing.

You all know this - if someone says something ENOUGH times, it becomes 'truth'. We are human that way.

 

[Genevanpreacher]

What would constitute proof to you?

Rev. 1:9--"I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ."

A verse from the Bible that supports your thinking he did?

 

[Genevanpreacher]

What translation is this? The Greek word is not the word for "rejoice" (xairo), but kauxaomai, "I boast." At any rate, since it says "except..." (EI MH), it could be referring to Paul in the Greek.

Sorry you disagree - but the men who wrote the 1560 Geneva Bible thought it did. Which is the Bible I quoted.

 

[Genevanpreacher]

What translation is this? The Greek word is not the word for "rejoice" (xairo), but kauxaomai, "I boast." At any rate, since it says "except..." (EI MH), it could be referring to Paul in the Greek.

Also Greek is not the ONLY language they translated from.

 

[tyndale1946]

You stay out from under my rock! It's getting way to crowded under here!

T.C. I guess I'm not the only one under a rock... You and the others made me feel better... Brother Glen