Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephibosheth
You choose. Connect the dots.
|
Wow. It seemed so obvious to me. John would assume that all his readers knew that there were seven flames of fire, burning before the throne (ark/mercy seat) since Moses built them "according to the heavenly vision". Don't you think he would expect his readers to connect his "New Testament" revelation with that of the old? As I said, the NT text is repeatedly self-referential. It coninually says, "As the scriptures said", or "That the scriptures might be fulfilled."
So when Witness Lee, and others, said that suddenly these seven spirits, burning before the throne, were something new, and hitherto unknown, it just seemed strange to me. Here is all this previous textual material, and we just ignore it, because of our concepts. Do you think John expected his readers to not connect these (pretty obvious, to me) dots? You be the judge. I mean, what is more central to Jewish identity, and culture, and historicity, than the seven lamps of fire burning in the Holy Place? You don't think people wouldn't reference this?
In all actuality, I'm not saying that seven angels are the seven spirits. But doesn't it seem coincidental, at least? Worth considering? The Church Fathers did. It was discussed, whether the seven angels standing before God in Rev 8:2 were the seven spirits in front of the throne of God in Rev 1:4. I say, it explains a lot of the spirit/angel issues found elsewhere in the text. Perhaps, gasp, that is what John is doing here.
Instead, we ostensibly have, in this one instance, the number "seven" being rolled into "sevenfold intensified", because our creed, developed centuries later, requires it. But, are the seven churches actually one church, sevenfold intensified? No? Are the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem actually one gate, twelvefold intensified? No? Then why require it, here? Why pummel the text with your ideology? If there are seven spirits, maybe, gasp, there are seven spirits!