The Confessing Seventh-day Adventist

Right now, this particular thread is only open to Anni and me. If you'd like to participate, please email me your comment or question and I will decide if your proposed post should be added.

I have often claimed to have new light on the Investigative Judgment. Anni is a genuine Adventist Christian that seems sufficiently dissatisfied with the traditional Adventist explanation and contacted me to get my thoughts on the doctrine. In our private communication I hinted at what my unique perspective requires: "It's a long roundabout way of getting at the essential Adventist understanding but it avoids all the popular pitfalls."

I suspect that many honest Adventist scholars have a nagging dissatisfaction with the Investigative Judgment doctrine [1] [2]. And I believe that all Adventists should be dissatisfied. The current poorly articulated prophetic interpretation of the Old Testament sanctuary services is a doctrine of extraordinary complexity. Yet the Seventh-day Adventist hierarchy is pleased with it (in spite of the large number of seemingly unrelated texts, weak assumptions and arguments that even Adventists dispute) and calls it a fundamental belief.

My explanation of the Investigative Judgment is essentially just a straightforward consequence of the 7 seals in Revelation being a stunning repetition of the Olivet Discourse. My outline of the book of Revelation is given here. The unavoidable consequence of that new, easy-to-justify, yet thoroughly Adventist interpretation of the book of Revelation is that Rev 8:1 must parallel Christ's Investigative Judgment parable (Matthew 25:14-30).

Before we discuss the Olivet Discourse, the 7 seals, multiple scenarios and how that serves as an unassailable foundation for the essentials of the Investigative Judgment doctrine, let me show you what unsympathetic scholars to the Adventist understanding of the IJ have written on some of the pertinent verses.

John MacArthur, in a message on Matthew 25:14-19, explains that the kingdom of heaven in this passage refers to all those who identify themselves with Christ. “Some are true believers and some are false.” John MacArthur understands clearly that the professed believers are investigated and those who don’t measure up are separated from those who do. [3].

And further down the same page, MacArthur's insight on Matthew 25:19 is very relevant:

Jesus says in verse 19, "After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them." The word translated "reckon" is a commercial term meaning "to compare accounts." The master of the household returned from his trip, and looked at his records to see how his servants did with their resources. —ibid.

The importance of multiple scenarios is that Revelation 8:1 interprets the end of the Olivet prophecy as taking place in heaven.

"When He opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour."

Desmond Ford comments:

"The silence reminds us of the Day of Atonement, the only complete Sabbath of the year, the most solemn time of judgment prior to the rejoicing of Tabernacles." … The "Silence in Heaven," "It is the day of the Atonement, the priest has gone into the holy place, and 'no man goes in the tabernacle till he comes out'."

"In Rev 8:2, the golden censer with much incense and the subsequent casting down to earth of the censer with fire is reminiscent of the day of Atonement. To Israel, that day was the close of the year's probation. Whoever did not humble himself before the Lord by abstinence from all work, by prayer, by penitence, and fasting, was cut off. On this day the believing Israelite was sealed." — Revelation: Crisis, Vol. 2, pp. 429-433.

When did the Investigative Judgment begin?

a). At the seventh seal, just before the seven trumpet judgments.
b). In the second scenario: an assumed end of the world.
c). A time associated with "a little book which was open."

Note: The book of Daniel was unsealed in the Revelation to John (Rev. 10:2 cf. Daniel 12:4): “But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”

It is my thesis of multiple scenarios that interprets very naturally the Millerite movement being the second scenario of the book of Revelation. The world could have ended then. However, there is a third and final scenario that seems to have been destined for fulfillment because of an overriding prophetic structure: In the first scenario, the book of destiny is being opened. In the second scenario, the book is opened. In the third scenario, the conclusion is that the hour of God's judgment has come.

I believe that it might be possible to specify the time of the Investigative Judgment with even greater precision. Please don't be distressed that the next paragraph seems incomprehensible but I love the thought for its audacity and power. Just think of it as an incidental conjecture.

I believe that it can be argued that the disappointment mentioned in Revelation 10 parallels the opening of the book of destiny, which is the Investigative Judgment. Note this parallel: The Lamb came to the Father and took a book out of the Father's hand and then opened it (Rev. 5:7). John was commanded to go and take the book which was open in the hand of the angel and then eat it (Rev. 10:8-11). "Then I took the little book out of the angel’s hand and ate it" (Rev. 10:10). If this parallel was intentional, then I suspect that its interpretation is simple and straightforward. I believe it probably means that the opening of the book of destiny coincides with a bitter-sweet experience: the great disappointment of the Millerites (verse 11). Hence it might be very probable that the Investigative Judgment began on October 23rd 1844 precisely at 12AM Eastern-Standard Time. How's that for mathematically poetic reasoning?

I still believe your thesis is capable of bringing Revival to Adventism.

For the sake of well-organized expositioning, well aware that I will be repetitive of basic facts already intensively discussed, I will begin summarizing what I do understand so far, and you may evaluate if I sufficiently comprehend the fundamentals of the indispensable framework for your whole elaboration. I wanted to work thoroughly through it all before posting anything, and boil down a little more the details that still keep me pondering, in order to ask sensible questions. Yet I also felt prompted to get started without too much delay, and this latter impulse results to be more dominant. I hope you will not mind this.

You have stated the Olivet Discourse, the 7 seals and multiple scenarios serve as unassailable foundation for the understanding of the Investigative Judgment. The fundamental underlying principle justifying your biblical approach is Conditionalism (Jeremiah 18:7-10). There is no biblical argument for excluding the book of Revelation from the much evidenced conditionality in God´s prophetic revelations; neither are Christ´s direct announcements while here on earth to be handled differently - the author of all prophecy is One. Prophecy doesn't have to be viewed mechanically. I believe a prospect can be absolute and still dynamic. There is no excuse for ruling out the possibility of different prophetic outlooks within one major prophetic vision. Multiple scenarios are possible and suggested by God himself (Amos 7:1-6).

The Olivet Discourse is undeniably mingling two prophetic outlooks.

One prophecy is an exact, unmistakable delineation of future events; the other insists on your ignorance of the future and cautions you to be ready no matter what.”

In your exchange with Florin Laiu you recapitulate, and in another thread´s reply Steve Starman recapitulates this point very clearly. Jesus´ own given perspective of immediate return was an absolute purpose within a definite time frame; but he gave no absolute certainty in regard to its ultimate completion. Says Jesus (Matthew 24:36): But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. I believe this statement addresses a deeper meaning than only the “exact timing issue” but declares once for all that all prophetic fulfillment lies ultimately in the hands of God alone. I disagree with Tall73 in regard to him interpreting the foretelling of more than two binary options of further historic development as a “throwing out guesses” and in regard to him identifying such approach as Hegelian dialectic, although his objection had me thinking for a while, and although I still have much difficulties with Daniel. To come back to Christ´s statement, I think it leaves enough space to be considered a hint to the possibility of indefinite delay. By inherent logic and necessity, the causes of such delay as well as the delay itself give birth to a different outlook of historic development; which Christ did foresee – and mention. And because Jesus did in fact not return within the apostles´ generation – that is, within the definitive time frame he himself gave -, the original perspective proves to be revised and such different outlook unfolds – which is depicted by you as the Second Scenario.

This nature of prophetic revelation is absolutely plausible and convincingly evident, once considered. When it comes to details I find things a bit harder to crack. Your literary structure of Revelation

1. A Call To Overcome (Rev 1-3).
2. The Court Assembled (Rev 4-5).

3. The First Scenario (Rev 6).
4. The Second Scenario (Rev 7-11).
5. The Third Scenario (Rev 12-18).

6. The Court’s Final Verdict (Rev 19-20).
7. The Reward Of Those Who Overcome (Rev 21-22).

does convince me perfectly as an overall frame. I do have some problems with the details of Revelation 7-11 though, the Second Scenario. It is the only passage of chapters in Revelation where I don´t see the multiple scenario delineation match with the content and chronology of the text. I know someone else brought this doubt already up, but I don´t recall the discussion as clarifying my confusion. Would you explain a little more in detail the “re-ordering” of chapters/passages that you suggest? I am fully convinced you do not treat Scripture as a Rubik´s Cube (well in a another sense you might, but I do refer to twisting the text force- and artfully so it fits one´s logic arrangement), and I believe your structure itself stands the test regardless. Yet I need to see more clearly the inner relations of these passages. In this context also, would you fix the link to your more detailed reflection on the three Woes in your discussion with Florin Laiu? I will only be able to really proceed when these elements are put in proper perspective (more or less).

I hope my petition is not too general.

PS: One question:

You consider your statement

I believe that it can be argued that the disappointment mentioned in Revelation 10 parallels the opening of the book of destiny, which is the Investigative Judgment. Note this parallel: The Lamb came to the Father and took a book out of the Father's hand and then opened it (Rev. 5:7). John was commanded to go and take the book which was open in the hand of the angel and then eat it (Rev. 10:8-11). "Then I took the little book out of the angel’s hand and ate it" (Rev. 10:10). If this parallel was intentional, then I suspect that its interpretation is simple and straightforward. I believe it probably means that the opening of the book of destiny coincides with a bitter-sweet experience: the great disappointment of the Millerites (verse 11). Hence it might be very probable that the Investigative Judgment began on October 23rd 1844 precisely at 12AM Eastern-Standard Time.

an incidental conjecture?!

PPS: Three more thoughts tonight (Germany)/ this afternoon (US), not content-related:

1) I believe it would be in accord with the idea of well-organized expositioning and greatly benefit anyone crossing this thread if you would give a brief overview of what you consider the “popular pitfalls” of the traditional view on the Investigative Judgment, and explain why any Adventist should feel a nagging dissatisfaction with it. I know this implies much work, so it´s just a suggestion. Consider, though, that you have the talent of making scholarly complex subjects transparent and of getting them right at their crux.

It might be too much in advance, but I am looking forward to seeing in what perspective you put the Sanctuary typology within your own unique defense of the Investigative Judgment. Question: what is the biblical purpose of the Sanctuary parable and what is its proper place in Adventist apologetics?

2) Have you ever thought about translating your prophecy outline into a graphic scheme? Ellen White endorses such enterprise.

3) Does the renaming of your forum have anything to do with The Confessing Church that evolved during the Third Reich? If not, I believe it´s a tremendous coincidence, considering the future prospect.

There is something to the tears of John that unfolded the significance of the court scene in Rev. 5 to me. It is probably all too obvious to you, but for me it is a clarifying piece of the puzzle, although a personal impression and disputable. In any way, it does harmonize perfectly with your thesis.

One of these mornings I was reading chapter 5 of Revelation, and this passage called my attention:

1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.

I got caught by this phrase:

And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.

On my way to work, this verse kept echoing in my mind, and I was completely stirred by the following question:

Why does John cry so much?

Immediately, various biblical records in which different persons weep and cry came to my mind. There are many more such moments, but these were the ones that I recalled instantly and vividly:

Esau cried when he realizes he has lost the blessing of the firstborn by unawarely selling it for a bowl of lentils. He and Jacob cried when they met on the field years after the whole unsound family story. Isaac couldn´t be consoled over the apparent death of his favorite son. When in Egypt his brothers were brought to him, Josef, deeply moved by the encounter, ran off into another chamber and cried from the bottom of his soul. Saul, this torn and tragic man, cried when David, whom he loved and hated, spared his life and confronted him in the cave. David and Jonathan, these exceptional friends, cried when they met while David was being persecuted by Saul. David cried anguishly about the death of his beloved traitor son Absalom. Hanna in prayer wept silently at the temple. We´re told of two occasions in which Jesus cried: once lamenting over Jerusalem, His chosen but blinded people; another time when seeing the mourners at Lazarus´ home, which made the Jews around think he was mourning about Lazarus (Ellen White says he cried for Israel and their neglection to believe and the doom they were themselves choosing). There is this woman who wets the feet of Jesus with tears of unexpressable sentiments for the Saviour of the world. Petrus goes and cries bitterly after having denied Jesus three times, fulfilling his Lord´s words. Paul cries day and night on behalf of his brethren in faith, having a great burden for their souls upon his heart. Jeremiah cries all the time, and the psalms of David are rich of tears, too. There are many torn spirits, many moved souls and many broken hearts testified in the Bible.

I researched a little more about tears in the Scriptures. Besides the tears of emotional pain of a hurt and broken heart, I found the following “kinds of tears” listed as recorded in the Bible:

A) Tears of Joy
B) Tears of Gratitude
C) Tears of Compassion
D) Tears of Regret
E) Tears of Hell

My point is this. I don´t recall and I doubt there are any references in the Bible to someone crying because of a frustrated curiosity. I know that the veiled significance of things and hence a frustrated curiosity can be upsetting and even be depressing; but I believe one would have to be really obsessed with something in an unsound manner in order to be "weeping much" because one wasn´t allowed to have more insight into that subject.

One may be overcome by tears, though, when there is a vital problem of enormous/fatal consequences and there is no solution for it and all hope is lost. I believe that when true Christians cry about the fact that certain light is denied to them, it is not so much for the denied knowledge (frustrated curiosity) but for its spiritual causes and implications. John without doubt was a true christian. The text says that he did not only cry, but he cried “much”. I think there is deep meaning to his tears.

So the question ringing inside of me got more specific:

What exactly is it about the fact that there was no one worthy to open and read the book, that made John weep so strongly?

The rest of Revelation 5 does answer that question. John faced the existential dead-end street mankind was on without the lamb slain. He felt the terribly hopeless and forsaken condition. Steve Starman, keenly relating it to the 3 scenario perspective, has observed this in one of his posts, a rather universal observation but that I had intuitively embraced as relevant for my further understanding of the scene. But it is only now being impressed by John´s tears that I really come to understand its significance.

Steve wrote:

As I studied these Scriptures, I noticed, for the first time, a small mystery. After the Father is introduced as seated on His throne, holding the scroll that must be examined during the judgment, a strong angel asks: “Who is worthy to open the book [scroll] and to break its seals?” (Rev 5:2, NASB) The next sentence answers the question in a manner that is rather odd: “And no one in heaven or on earth was able to open the book or look into it” (vs. 3). I’ve always read this passage as a grammatical construct, used to dramatically introduce the successful Messiah in Rev 5:5-6. This time, though, I read it a bit differently. Could God be providing another clue that this scene was describing first century events (the ‘bridge’ into the first scenario)? Truly, there was a time in the first century, when there was no one in heaven or earth when worthy to open the scroll: when Christ was a man on earth, and had not yet accomplished His purpose as the Savior of mankind upon the cross. John next hears an elder provide the answer to the question—there is one worthy—and he then sees “a Lamb standing, as if slain.” The Messiah had now overcome. I see here a hint wherein God is showing that the court was assembled in the first century.

John was crying much in vision because he saw that the world, every single soul, was absolutely lost without the lamb slain, the substitutionary death of God´s son for our sin. That refers to pardon in first place. But not alone. The fact that the John´s mourning about the “no one worthy” is connected with the opening and reading of the book is a very strong indication that the hopeless condition of mankind he perceived was not only due to the lack of someone “worthy”, but also to the unopening and unreading of the book. Both the finding of someone worthy to open the book AND the opening of the book are indispensable in order to still John´s tears.

Pondering this thought, the following Bible verse was brought to my mind and struck me deeply, when recognizing its powerful significance for the whole context of Revelation 5:

And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
1 Corinthians 15:14-18

Christ brought forgiveness and freedom from condemnation by his death, there is peace in his blood; but the hope of final redemption and everlasting life lies in his resurrection and ascension, which make possible intercession in heaven on the sinner´s behalf and the believer´s cleansing from sin in order to restore him unto Heaven.

John´s bitter tears are related to the seven seals unbroken and the scroll unopened & unread. But John wasn´t crying because he wasn´t allowed to see "future events" per se. Nor was he just upset because he realized that this sinful history of mankind wouldn´t be brought to an end without the opening of the book first. It´s much deeper. I believe he cried because he was made aware of the vanity of hope without a pre-advent judgment.

Only when Christ would be there in the heavenly courts and break the seventh seal and open and read the book of destiny, all what had been done so far in behalf of man could be completed and thus come truly effective. There is no final sanctioning of the believing sinner´s soul to enter the heavenly gates without the reading of the book. Does the reading of the book point to a pre-advent investigative judgment? I believe that is the most plausible of all explanations.

This represents perfectly the Adventist understanding of the plan of redemption:

The sanctuary services emphasized three aspects of Christ's work for us: sacrifice, mediation, and judgment. In general, the three parts of the sanctuary corresponded to these three kinds of ministry. Sacrifice occurred in the court, mediation in the holy place, and judgment in the Most Holy Place.

John cried because he knew that without Christ´s resurrection and his mediation in the heavenly courts, we all would remain in our sins; and that without an investigative judgment there was no hope, because not one single soul would be declared fit for heaven. Christ would not return to take anyone home. The Investigative Judgment on the believers is Good News, and we should praise God for it.

Eugene wrote:

The heavenly court was assembled in the first century; that’s when Christ took possession of the book, but the book was not opened until 1844.

Why didn´t the Investigative Judgment take place in the first century?

Steve wrote:

The Apostolic church understood that Christ was to return very soon, after: the predicted “falling away;” the activities of the “man of sin;” and the gospel witness being given to the entire world. After many years—and much tribulation—the original Apostles were almost all deceased. John was an old man, and imprisoned. He receives his prophecies, all of which are possible scenarios for the end of time, and all of which are updated so as to be contemporary. The book begins (and ends) with the assurance that the prophecies would come to pass very soon. God then reveals the current state of the Christian church, and states exactly what the churches, in order for Christ to return, must do very soon.

I assume they didn´t do it.

anni wrote: I do have some problems with the details of Revelation 7-11 though, the Second Scenario. It is the only passage of chapters in Revelation where I don´t see the multiple scenario delineation match with the content and chronology of the text…. Would you explain a little more in detail the “re-ordering” of chapters/passages that you suggest?

I see now, from a quick review of my thesis overview with Steve Starman, that I failed to mention a terribly important observation: There is an interlude between the 6th and 7th seal (Rev 7), between the 6th and 7th trumpet (Rev 10:1--11:13), and between the 6th and 7th vial (Rev 16:13-16). [4] [5] [6].

To back up even further, I will now state my definition of a scenario as I use the term. A scenario is a reasonably continuous sequence of either expected or supposed events. An interlude then is whatever obviously breaks and noticeably disrupts that natural sequence. From a very straightforward reading of Revelation, it clearly follows that Rev 10:1--11:13 interrupts the natural flow of the seven trumpet judgments and is thus an interlude, according to my definition.

The seven trumpet judgments are unquestionably severe judgments that have never been seen before, not obscure historical events of the past, because they are easily comparable to the seven last plagues. Why are these two series of judgments so similar?

Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all God’s people, on the golden altar in front of the throne. The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of God’s people, went up before God from the angel’s hand. Then the angel took the censer, filled it with fire from the altar, and hurled it on the earth; and there came peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning and an earthquake. Revelation 8:3-5.

I assume you agree that the casting down of the golden censer in Revelation 8:3-5 runs parallel to Revelation 15:8: "And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God and from his power, and no one could enter the temple until the seven plagues of the seven angels were completed." This ending to priestly intercession (Rev 8:3-5) and denial of access to the throne of mercy (Rev 15:8) represents the close of probation. This is the essential meaning of Matthew 25:10-12:

But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.
“Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’
“But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’ Matthew 25:10-12.

Next, please examine very carefully the verses just before and just after the second interlude (Rev 10:1--11:13). The immediate units of prophecy that surround this interlude are the three woes mentioned in Rev 8:13. I believe that the only reasonable interpretation of these three woes is that they are precisely the fifth, sixth, and seventh trumpet judgments. The trumpet interlude fits snugly between the sixth and seventh trumpet.

Revelation 8:13
As I watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: “Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!”

Revelation 9:1-11
The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, [and a terrible woe followed].

Revelation 9:12
The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come.

Here we are told that this judgment has concluded.

Revelation 9:13-21
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet, [and a terrible woe followed].

Revelation 10:1--11:13 (The interlude between the 6th and 7th trumpet)
The entirety of these verses describes the Millerite experience. That is not a woe.

Revelation 11:14
The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.

I believe this verse ignores the preceding interlude as if it wasn't even there and refers back to the end of the sixth trumpet: Revelation 9:21.

Revelation 11:15-19
The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, [and a terrible woe followed].

Then begins the third scenario.

Revelation 16:13-16 (The interlude between the 6th and 7th vial)
The seven last plagues (Rev 16) are a natural sequence and in this sequence Rev 16:13-16 is out of place.

Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
“Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon. Rev 16:13-16.

The battle of Armageddon is a spiritual battle and the powers of the Earth are already on a steady march to fight in this war. It is very clear that these demonic spirits are active now and will intensify their deceptions before the close of probation. — It is extraordinarily difficult to conceive of the deceptions of these three demons as beginning immediately after the sixth plague and not starting with Revelation 13:11-15. This must be an interlude.

Revelation 7
Now turn to the interlude between the sixth and seventh seal. Without a doubt, the first six seals satisfy the definition of a scenario. — The events may be interpreted naturally as a period of uninterrupted tribulation in a reasonable sequence. Rev 7:1 then introduces a new scene of relative calm, as if tribulation had been unknown for centuries.

Revelation 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree.

This is clearly the beginning of a second scenario. Out of the relative calm, God's people are quickly sealed, and then judgments fall on the land, the sea and the trees. Everything in this scenario is new and completely foreign to what Jesus prophesied in the Olivet Discourse.

Note the previous mention of the land, the sea and trees. The first trumpet judgment strikes the land and the trees:

Revelation 8:7
The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down on the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.

The second trumpet judgment strikes the sea:

Revelation 8:8-9
The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned into blood, a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

There is also a connection to the fifth trumpet: It references the seal of God mentioned previously:

Revelation 9:3-4
And out of the smoke locusts came down on the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads.

Note that these demon locusts cooperate with the preceding destructive powers that are harming the earth, plants and trees. This is a logically connected sequence. To assign an implied order of events in the second scenario, I propose that the trumpet interlude (Rev 10:1--11:13) should be placed just before the opening of Revelation 7. In the third scenario, I believe we should interpret the plague interlude (Rev 16:13-16) as a commentary that obviously runs parallel to the intense deceptions and supernatural activity prophesied in Revelation 13:11-15.

The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come.
Here I mean that I finished one complete explanation and two more woes are yet to come. To be continued.

anni wrote:There is something to the tears of John that unfolded the significance of the court scene in Rev. 5 to me. It is probably all too obvious to you, but for me it is a clarifying piece of the puzzle, although a personal impression and disputable.

Actually, I always had a mental block on Revelation 5 until I read your commentary. Now I have a keen understanding of it, praise the Lord. I believe your impression is exactly what John's vision is meant to convey.

My understanding of Revelation 5 was also helped through a personal impression. Early Saturday morning, just a few hours before you posted your insights on Revelation 5, I was in great distress in a very unpleasant dream. I quickly forgot most of the dream when I woke up but I remember the gist of it: I was dreaming that determined leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the State were prosecuting me as the accused in a case of wrongful death. The dream was essentially a false memory of a previous real yet kangaroo criminal and civil trial instigated by unquestionably unspiritual Adventist leaders that were trying to punish and silence me. In the dream, I was agonizing about unanswerable accusations and evidence that someone died because of my actions. In my great distress and bewilderment I struggled to make sense of it all. I knew that the way things were happening were not the way that I had remembered them. In my recollection of things no one died. I couldn't resolve my confusion logically. Applying logic is impossible in dreams. There was a part of my consciousness that knew that this was a dream based on a past event. Was it really possible that I forgot (blanked out) major details about my past involvement? Was I really responsible for someone's demise? I woke up continuing to wonder about the degree to which I was criminally sinful and responsible in the crime for which I had been accused. In my awakened state of mind, the doubts that I had based on the false memory/scenario that I was dreaming about evaporated quickly. I estimated that it took about 20 seconds for it to disappear completely.

I apologize for sharing such a bad dream but it vividly reminded me of a feature of genuinely inspired dreams and visions. It is my hope that others will appreciate what I learned from it. For illustrative purposes, I will also counterbalance that depressing selection with an elevating example.

The most awesome revelation that I had ever received was a vision that progressed to worshiping God in heaven. In that vision, I was overwhelmed by a joy so intense and indescribable that I can confidently say that I have experienced the exact same joy that the saved will realize with astonishing force when they worship God in heaven. God is the most thrilling Thing in the universe.

The heavenly intensity of my unspeakably profound peace and joy wasn't something that originated within me. It came from the Holy Spirit. In the same way, John wept intensely because he was given his thoughts. It wasn't his rational mind reacting intelligently to the message that no one in heaven or on the earth was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. The purpose of the vision of Revelation 5 primarily was to communicate the worthiness of the lamb and the importance of Him opening the scroll and looking inside, which is the Investigative Judgment.

Steve Starman wrote:As I studied these Scriptures, I noticed, for the first time, a small mystery. After the Father is introduced as seated on His throne, holding the scroll that must be examined during the judgment, a strong angel asks: “Who is worthy to open the book [scroll] and to break its seals?” (Rev 5:2, NASB) The next sentence answers the question in a manner that is rather odd: “And no one in heaven or on earth was able to open the book or look into it” (vs. 3). I’ve always read this passage as a grammatical construct, used to dramatically introduce the successful Messiah in Rev 5:5-6.

I agree that it's a small mystery and "although a personal impression and disputable," nevertheless I believe that the dramatic introduction hypothesis is correct. I also accept the dramatic conclusion hypothesis.

Revelation 5:13
Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!”

Notice in this verse that the vision leaps to the distant future where all creatures, even the most primitive sea creatures, are praising God. That's an interesting purely artistic conclusion given that John later sees the new earth without any sea (Rev 21:1).

I must conclude that Revelation 5 is communicating ideas dramatically, artistically, not literally. Behold the incredible beauty of this artistic masterpiece. The scope of the vision of Revelation 5 begins with the seemingly utter hopelessness of no atonement and then jumps quickly to the final end of a completed atonement with every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing a song of praise to God and to the Lamb. Will starfish be singing words of praise? Also, I find it interesting that no discernible historical details are revealed between these two mysteriously fantastic extremes. That incredibly wide gap with virtually nothing in between is a brilliant introduction to the rest of the vision, which supplies a plentitude of events in the unfolding of salvation history.

Revelation 11:14
The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.

A scenario is a reasonably continuous sequence of either expected or supposed events. An interlude then is whatever obviously breaks and noticeably disrupts that natural sequence. From a very straightforward reading of Revelation, it clearly follows that Rev 10:1--11:13 interrupts the natural flow of the seven trumpet judgments and is thus an interlude, according to my definition.

Yes.

I assume you agree that the casting down of the golden censer in Revelation 8:3-5 runs parallel to Revelation 15:8. (...) This ending to priestly intercession (Rev 8:3-5) and denial of access to the throne of mercy (Rev 15:8) represents the close of probation. This is the essential meaning of Matthew 25:10-12.

Yes.

Next, please examine very carefully the verses just before and just after the second interlude (Rev 10:1--11:13). The immediate units of prophecy that surround this interlude are the three woes mentioned in Rev 8:13. I believe that the only reasonable interpretation of these three woes is that they are precisely the fifth, sixth, and seventh trumpet judgments.

After going through it, I believe this is truly the case.

The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, [and a terrible woe followed]. Then begins the third scenario. (...)
The seven last plagues (Rev 16) are a natural sequence and in this sequence Rev 16:13-16 is out of place. (...) — It is extraordinarily difficult to conceive of the deceptions of these three demons as beginning immediately after the sixth plague and not starting with Revelation 13:11-15. This must be an interlude.

Yes, definitely, although perhaps only adventists may come to fully see this.

Now turn to the interlude between the sixth and seventh seal. Without a doubt, the first six seals satisfy the definition of a scenario. — The events may be interpreted naturally as a period of uninterrupted tribulation in a reasonable sequence. Rev 7:1 then introduces a new scene of relative calm, as if tribulation had been unknown for centuries.

Revelation 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree.

This is clearly the beginning of a second scenario. Out of the relative calm, God's people are quickly sealed, and then judgments fall on the land, the sea and the trees. Everything in this scenario is new and completely foreign to what Jesus prophesied in the Olivet Discourse.

True.

There is also a connection to the fifth trumpet: It references the seal of God mentioned previously:
Revelation 9:3-4
And out of the smoke locusts came down on the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads.

A significant detail!

To assign an implied order of events in the second scenario, I propose that the trumpet interlude (Rev 10:1--11:13) should be placed just before the opening of Revelation 7. In the third scenario, I believe we should interpret the plague interlude (Rev 16:13-16) as a commentary that obviously runs parallel to the intense deceptions and supernatural activity prophesied in Revelation 13:11-15.

Agreed.

Here I mean that I finished one complete explanation

You did, Eugene. Your post is the perfect answer to my inquiry. It all makes sense. Everything is clear, which is beautiful; seriously: simply beautiful. Although I am certainly looking forward to your continuation of this issue, with this part put in perspective I am now already able to move on.

I apologize for sharing such a bad dream but it vividly reminded me of a feature of genuinely inspired dreams and visions.

I couldn't resolve my confusion logically. Applying logic is impossible in dreams.

The heavenly intensity of my unspeakably profound peace and joy wasn't something that originated within me. It came from the Holy Spirit. In the same way, John wept intensely because he was given his thoughts. It wasn't his rational mind reacting intelligently to the message that no one in heaven or on the earth was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. The purpose of the vision of Revelation 5 primarily was to communicate the worthiness of the lamb and the importance of Him opening the scroll and looking inside, which is the Investigative Judgment.

(bold from my part)

I know exactly what you mean and I wholeheartedly agree.

Revelation 5:13
Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!”

Notice in this verse that the vision leaps to the distant future where all creatures, even the most primitive sea creatures, are praising God. That's an interesting purely artistic conclusion given that John later sees the new earth without any sea (Rev 21:1).

Fine detail. How many words that come from the mouth of God just slip through our readings.

I must conclude that Revelation 5 is communicating ideas dramatically, artistically, not literally. Behold the incredible beauty of this artistic masterpiece. The scope of the vision of Revelation 5 begins with the seemingly utter hopelessness of no atonement and then jumps quickly to the final end of a completed atonement with every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing a song of praise to God and to the Lamb. Will starfish be singing words of praise?

I remember in one of your postings you wrote

The book of Daniel was written with remarkable precision and invites us to interpret every detail with exact mathematical reasoning. However, the book of Revelation is primarily devotional and its meaning is conveyed through an artistic style. Don't be disappointed if you can't fathom the subtlety of every detail in Revelation. There is a lot there and much of it is to inspire us with the deep things of God.

and I just had to fully agree with that.

Also, I find it interesting that no discernible historical details are revealed between these two mysteriously fantastic extremes. That incredibly wide gap with virtually nothing in between is a brilliant introduction to the rest of the vision, which supplies a plentitude of events in the unfolding of salvation history.

I have nothing more to add. Except that I will never understand those whom this book doesn´t inspire profound awe.

Anni,

Here is a very interesting footnote that I should add to the second scenario:

Walter Martin wrote: Based largely upon the apocalyptic books of Daniel and Revelation, the theology of the Advent Movement was discussed in the newspapers as well as in theological journals. New Testament eschatology competed with stock market quotations for front-page space, and the "seventy weeks," "twenty-three hundred days," and "the abomination of desolation" (Daniel 8-9) were common subjects of conversation.

Lest anyone reading the various accounts of the rise of "Millerism" in the United States come to the conclusion that Miller and his followers were misguided, the following facts should be known: The Great Advent Awakening movement that spanned the Atlantic from Europe was bolstered by a tremendous wave of contemporary biblical scholarship. Although Miller himself lacked academic theological training, actually scores of prophetic scholars in Europe and the United States had espoused Miller's views before he himself announced them. In reality, his was only one more voice proclaiming the 1843/1844 fulfillment of Daniel 8:14, or the 2300-day period allegedly dating from 457 B.C. and ending in A.D. 1843-1844. Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, (1997 edition), pp. 521-522.

For more on Walter Martin's understanding of Seventh-day Adventism, see Was Ellen G. White an Evangelical Christian?

Liebe Anni,

Looking back, I apologize for the distress that I probably caused you by the frustrating ambiguity or incomprehensibility of my incidental conjecture. I should have stated up front that I call the sealed book in the Father's hand (Revelation 5:1-3) the book of destiny and that I interpret the little book open in Revelation 10 as an altogether different book (the book of Daniel). Since Seventh-day Adventists are all alone in their interpretation of the little book in Revelation 10 being the book of Daniel, and since I'm sort of a heretic and dissident in the eyes of many Adventists, let's review this subject to see if my particular synthesis is even reasonable.

I believe that the proper approach is to first discuss hermeneutics. A hermeneutic is simply a principle of interpretation. In general, suppose that we have been given many conflicting interpretations of a passage of Scripture. Assuming that we are both very reasonable and that God is guiding both of us, is it possible for us to decide and agree which of the many conflicting interpretations is the strongest one? Formally stated, let's define an interpretation as a set of indisputable, probable or just reasonable facts together with a collection of interrelationships that connect those reasonable facts into a single, visible, sensible, unified structure. Intuitively, I believe that it's reasonable to affirm that the strongest interpretation is the interpretation that has the greatest number of relevant facts and connecting links between those facts, with the fewest number of unsupportable assumptions and the fewest number of seeming discrepancies.

This philosophy of mine (a definition really) is based on two simple ideas: 1. Truth is modular. Everything we know can be disassembled into irreducible axioms. 2. Proverbs 18:17. "The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him" (NASB). So we should expect that there are beliefs in theology and even in science that may seem compelling until they are contrasted with unacknowledged facts and a more thoughtful interpretation.

For the record, after I had received my own supernatural revelation on prophecy while studying the Bible intensely for the first time, I examined many different Bible commentaries and I discovered that many gems of truth can be found everywhere. Thus I strongly agree with Ellen White who said that "gems of thought are to be gathered up and redeemed from their companionship with error" "and each gem is to become the property of God's people and find its true position in the framework of truth." [7].

This is easy to do once we understand that truth is modular. Since I am now working on writing my own commentary on the book of Revelation, starting with the most difficult chapters first, I'm especially pleased to take advantage of many non-Adventist sources that are available to me.

I'd like to briefly share with you what my many sources say about the book of Revelation 5:1-3 and the little book of Revelation 10. Also, as an example of what constitutes a strong interpretation, it might be especially instructive to contrast the depth of my best sources with my chosen synthesis. That should only require having to cite a few commentaries.

On Revelation 5:1-7, John MacArthur wrote:

The scroll John saw in God's hand is the title deed to the earth. Unlike other such deeds, however, it does not record the descriptive detail of what Christ will inherit, but rather how He will regain His rightful inheritance. It will occur by the divine judgment about to be poured out on the earth. While the scroll is a scroll of doom and judgment, it is also a scroll of redemption. It tells how Christ will redeem the world from Satan and those with him. Ezekiel describes the same scroll in his vision of heaven (Ezekiel 2:9-10). — John MacArthur, Because The Time Is Near, p. 118.

Intuitively we should be sympathetic with much of this quote because, in Revelation 5, opening the scroll seems equivalent to the merit of redeeming mankind fully and, apparently, also includes the necessity to punish the wicked. MacArthur appears to agree that opening God's scroll requires judgment but doesn't justify his assertion from Scripture. I will keep looking for references that might offer some quotable scholarly support.

Later in his book, explaining Revelation 10:1-2a, MacArthur wrote:

The angel held "in his hand a little book which was open." This is probably the same book described in Revelation 5:1, "sealed up with seven seals" and then opened in Revelation 6. Some argue that the use of the diminutive "little" in 10:2 distinguishes this book from the book of 5:1. Rather than distinguishing this book from the one in chapter 5, the diminutive form merely adds a further description of it in this vision. The book needed to be made smaller for the sake of the symbolism of this vision, since John was to eat it (10:9-10). Further, the use of the perfect participle form –"which was open"—emphasizes the idea of the scroll being open; having been opened, it is to remain open. That further identifies it with the fully unrolled scroll of 6:1ff as seal after seal is broken. The little book lying open in this unusual angel's hand unveils all the terrors of divine judgment yet to come. — John MacArthur, Because The Time Is Near p. 173.

Finally, on Revelation 10:8-11, MacArthur wrote:

The voice John had earlier heard from heaven (verse 4) forbidding him to record the words of the seven peals of thunder spoke to him again. As he had earlier (1:17; 4:1; 5:4-5; 7:13-14), John again became an active participant in this vision. He left the place of an observer to become an actor in the drama. The voice said to him, "Go, take the book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on the land." This third reference to the location of the angel emphasizes strongly the unusual authority he has over the earth. Then, in a graphic illustration of what a proper response on the part of believers to God's impending judgment should be, John was told, "Take it and eat it; it will make your stomach bitter, but in your mouth it will be sweet as honey." The angel knew what John's reaction to this truth would be. Obediently, like Ezekiel before him (Ezekiel 2:9—3:3), John in the vision symbolically took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it.

The act of eating the scroll symbolized the absorbing and assimilating of God's Word (cf. Psalm 19:10; Jeremiah 15:16; Ezekiel 3:1-3). When John took in the divine words concerning the remaining judgments as the Lord took possession of the universe, he found them both "sweet as honey" and "bitter." Sweet because John, like all believers, wanted the Lord to act in judgment to take back the earth that is rightfully His and be exalted and glorified as He deserved. Yet the realization of the terrible doom awaiting unbelievers turned that initial sweet taste into bitterness.

All who love Jesus Christ can relate to John's ambivalence. Believers long for Christ to return in glory, for Satan to be destroyed, and the glorious kingdom of our Lord to be set up on earth, in which He will rule in glory while establishing in the world righteousness, truth, and peace. But they, like Paul (Romans 9:1-3), mourn bitterly over the judgment of the ungodly. — John MacArthur, Because The Time Is Near pp. 177-8.

Here are the contradictions that I see in MacArthur's exposition. The most glaring of all (marked in red) is this sentence: "The book needed to be made smaller for the sake of the symbolism of this vision, since John was to eat it (10:9-10)." The glaring contradiction is that MacArthur identified the scroll of Revelation 5:1-3 as being identical to the scroll of Ezekiel 2:9-10. As he put it: "Ezekiel describes the same scroll in his vision of heaven (Ezekiel 2:9-10)." Yet neither scroll is stated to be of unusual size and Ezekiel had no problem eating the scroll that was presented to him in vision. So why did a regular-sized scroll have to be made smaller for John? Secondly, God said to Ezekiel, “Son of man, feed your belly, and fill your stomach with this scroll that I give you” (NKJV) and on it were written threats of coming judgment yet there is no mention from Ezekiel about indigestion.

Ezekiel 2:8--3:4
“Now you, son of man, listen to what I am speaking to you; do not be rebellious like that rebellious house. Open your mouth and eat what I am giving you.” Then I looked, and behold, a hand was extended to me; and lo, a scroll was in it. When He spread it out before me, it was written on the front and back, and written on it were lamentations, mourning and woe.
Then He said to me, “Son of man, eat what you find; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” So I opened my mouth, and He fed me this scroll. He said to me, “Son of man, feed your stomach and fill your body with this scroll which I am giving you.” Then I ate it, and it was sweet as honey in my mouth.
Then He said to me, “Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak with My words to them.”

I have one insight to share about the size of the little scroll (Revelation 10). Let's compare it to the fantastically large scroll of the vision of the prophet Zechariah.

Zechariah 5:1-4
Then I lifted up my eyes again and looked, and behold, there was a flying scroll. And he said to me, “What do you see?” And I answered, “I see a flying scroll; its length is twenty cubits and its width ten cubits.” Then he said to me, “This is the curse that is going forth over the face of the whole land; surely everyone who steals will be purged away according to the writing on one side, and everyone who swears will be purged away according to the writing on the other side. I will make it go forth,” declares the LORD of hosts, “and it will enter the house of the thief and the house of the one who swears falsely by My name; and it will spend the night within that house and consume it with its timber and stones.”

I propose that there isn't anything particularly necessary about God needing an absurdly large scroll to write out His judgments but that the vision is symbolic of gigantic curses written out in exquisitely exhaustive detail.

By contrast therefore, what is the most likely meaning of the littleness of the book of Revelation 10, which is stated there four times for emphasis (in the NKJV) that it is a little book? I have no doubt that the meaning of the small size of the book of Revelation 10 is that this little book has the appearance of being seemingly inconsequential.

I have to stop here and go to sleep. Hopefully I'll have energy to continue tomorrow.

Thank you, Eugene, for taking the time in order to look for a satisfying answer on this subject, and for providing this relevant thought and insight. I believe the adventist assumption that the little book in Revelation 10 is the book of Daniel really is not self evident, and I think it´s important to find sufficient biblical recommendation of this thesis, otherwise the teaching of truth easily becomes a matter of indoctrination. Honestly, I am relieved that it occured to McArthur, too, that the book might be interpreted as being the same scroll of Revelation 5, but that his supportive argument in favor of this view is self-contradicting and rather unconvincing. I believe the emphasized littleness and the final bitterness of the book when being digested certainly offer the clue to the right association. I still hope the link to the book of Daniel may be established more strongly.

Liebe anni,

Please forgive my delay. I meant to give you a survey of widely respected scholarly opinion on the book of destiny (Rev 5) and the little book (Rev 10). I believe that the following should suffice. I really didn't mean to suggest that anyone should take the writings of John MacArthur on prophecy seriously. MacArthur is a dispensationalist and therefore misunderstands prophecy. He is a pastor, not a scholar. I only wanted to include him because of his great exposition on the gospel. [8].

One scholar that is well-worth critiquing is Robert H. Mounce. The following quotes are from his commentary on the book of Revelation in The New International Commentary on the New Testament series.

On the right hand of the One seated on the throne is a book of unparalleled significance. Filled to overflowing and sealed with seven seals to insure the secrecy of its decrees, it contains the full account of what God in his sovereign will has determined as the destiny of the world.

The footnote to the last sentence states:

Other suggestions are (1) the Lamb's book of life (3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12,15; 21:27), (2) the OT, (3) a testament which insures inheritance for the saints, and (4) a doubly inscribed contract deed (cf. Beasley-Murray, pp. 120-22, for a discussion of this interpretation). Cf. Emmet Russell, "A Roman Law Parallel to Revelation Five," BSac, 115 (1958), pp. 258-64.

Back to the text:

Once again the background is Ezekiel where in chapter 2 a book of lamentations "written within and without" is handed to the prophet (vs. 10). The idea of a heavenly book containing the future course of history is reflected in such passages as Psalm 139:16, "In thy book were written every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them." In Jewish apocalyptic we read of "heavenly tablets" which contain "all the deeds of men … that will be upon the earth to the remotest generations" (1 Enoch 81:1-2; cf. also 47:3; 106:19; 107:1). According to Roman law certain documents were required to be sealed by seven witnesses, although the idea of seven seals as used here is undoubtedly governed by the symbolic use of the number seven in Revelation and signifies the absolute inviolability of the scroll. In Daniel 8:26 the prophet is told, "Seal up the vision, for it pertains to many days hence" (cf. Isa 29:11). When the time has fully come, the seals will be removed and history will move swiftly to its consummation. —Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, p. 142.

On the little book of Revelation 10:2 Mounce wrote:

In the hand of the angel is a little book (or scroll). Unlike the great scroll of chapter 5 which was fastened with seven seals, this scroll lies open in the hand of the angel. The scene which follows recalls Ezekiel 2:8—3:3 in which the scroll of lamentations was spread out before the prophet with the command that he should eat it. Although related to the Ezekiel passage, John's vision nevertheless develops along its own lines. —ibid p. 208.

Mounce does a lot of work for me as he reveals a wide range of scholarly opinion on the meaning of the little book.

I skip now to his commentary on Revelation 10:9-10. There Mounce wrote:

The angel repeats the command of the voice from heaven (Take the little book) and supplies the additional instruction, Eat it. The account of the commissioning of the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek 2:8-3:3) is an obvious parallel. Ezekiel is told to open his mouth and eat what is given to him. A hand appears with a scroll with words of lamentation and mourning written on the front and on the back. Upon eating the scroll Ezekiel found it to be as sweet as honey in his mouth. We are reminded of the Psalmist's words, "How sweet are thy words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth!" (Ps 119:103). A well-known passage in Jeremiah is similar, "Thy words were found, and I ate them, and thy words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart" (Jer 15:16). The command to devour the book is not simply a figurative way of saying, Digest it mentally. In John's case it led to a real act (although within a visionary experience), which in turn symbolizes the complete appropriation of prophetic revelation. John is to assimilate the content of the scroll before communicating it to others. Every true prophet of God knows the absolute necessity of this crucial requirement.

The identity of the little scroll has been extensively discussed. Hendriksen is representative of those who take it to be "the Word of God, his Gospel in which the mystery of salvation is set forth." Morris holds it to be "the Word of God to John" but goes on to caution the reader that since John did not specify what it referred to with any precision, we would be on dubious ground if we were to attempt to improve on him (p. 141). That the scroll or its contents is not specifically mentioned again in Revelation supports this reticence. Summers sees in the book a general message of woe—for men under the judgment of God, for Christians in the hands of their enemies, for the church in her conflict with Rome, and for Rome herself as she faces destruction (pp. 161-62). …

Other commentators, with varying degrees of certainty, hold that the first thirteen verses of the following chapter (11:1-13) make up the content of the little scroll. F. F. Bruce writes, "The context of John's little scroll are apparently represented by Rev 11:1-13, originally a separate and earlier apocalypse now incorporated in John's record and reinterpreted by him."

The answer to the identity of the little scroll is to a considerable extent tied up with the interpretation of its being sweet as honey in the mouth but making the belly bitter. It is usually held to be sweet because it is a word from God. Why it turns the stomach bitter is less certain. Commentators who do not limit the contents of the little book to chapter 11 tend to emphasize the judgment and woe which are to fall on the unbelieving world. It seems more plausible that the little scroll is a message for the believing church and is to be found in the following verses (11:1-13). In the parallel passage in Ezekiel the message of lamentation, mourning, and woe is to be delivered to the rebellious house of Israel (Ezek 3:4 ff). The prophet is not sent to a people of strange speech and a hard language (Ezek 3:5,6). The parallel in John's case would be the church, the new Israel. It is after the eating of the book that John is told he must prophesy again, this time concerning many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings (Rev 10:11). This begins with chapter 12. The sweet scroll which turns the stomach bitter is a message for the church. Before the final triumph believers are going to pass through a formidable ordeal. As the great scroll of chapter 5 outlined the destiny of all mankind, so the little scroll unveils the lot of the faithful in those last days of fierce Satanic opposition. It tells of the two witnesses who, when they have finished their testimony, are destroyed by the beast out of the abyss (11:7). Like the crucified Lord their dead bodies are exposed for public contempt (11:8). Erdman writes concerning the people of God faithfully bearing their testimony, that "they are delivered not from martyrdom and death, but through martyrdom and death to a glorious resurrection" (p. 99). The prospect of no further delay in the fulfillment of God's eternal purposes is sweet indeed. That it will involve a bitter prelude is hard to swallow. —ibid pp. 214-16.

Let's now consider all the proposed interpretations of the little book given so far.

From my definition of what makes one interpretation better than another, can you point out even one detail that elevates any of the given interpretations as being better than the standard Adventist interpretation?

I see two exceptionally good reasons why the traditional Adventist interpretation is indisputably better:

1. "The participle form—"which was open" —emphasizes the idea that the scroll was closed, is now open, and is to remain open. Mounce affirms this detail in footnote 11: "The perfect participle conveys the idea that the scroll, having been opened, is to remain that way" (p. 208). John MacArthur states this more forcefully: "The participle form—"which was open"—emphasizes the idea of the scroll being open; having been opened, it is to remain open. —Because The Time Is Near p. 173.

2. The bitterness of the scroll that John ate is most reasonably interpreted as a property intrinsic to the scroll itself. The realization that the book of Daniel, while seemingly an unconditional prophecy, foretold of a glorious event that was longed for and anticipated but did not materialize when expected, is unquestionably a bitter experience.