N
nancy_dalrymple
Guest
I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
They have become less fervent in their worship. They are called to go back to how they were when they first heard the Word.I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
Are you realy sure?Please pray for me,that the Lord will reveal to me soon,in Christ name,I pray Thank You I felt that too but have to be sure. Tomorrow I will talk to a priest if i can find one are their any on line to talk to? Get Back NancyThey have become less fervent in their worship. They are called to go back to how they were when they first heard the Word.
I view this passage in light of St. John’s Epistle (“God is love.”), Jesus’ offering of the greatest Commandment (“Love God above all and your neighbor as yourself…”), and His cautionary words for the end of times (“for I was hungry…”); that very joy of worshiping God through serving others in Love loses luster as we are exhausted by both those we seek to serve and our apparent failure to achieve any success… soon our struggle is within as we toil for the sake of the quest rather than to Love God and share His Love with others. That first Love, the one that bring us Life, escapes us even as we hold on to the rest of our Christian values and obligations.I would like to hear a few opinions on what the verse to go back to your first love is ment? Thank You Nancy
Their first love is Jesus Christ. He’s asking them to come back to Him.
Agreed!In Biblical interpretation, there’s an application for the passage in question that would be for the time it is originally written and also one for the time in which it is being read. So, it would be Ephesus (when it was written) and for us (as we read it now).
For us now reading it, you might say that to return to our first love would be similar to the Ephesians: a renewal of faith and a return to living a godly life. (Just my opinion).
I’d say it’s because they had become lukewarm meaning they had lost their fervent love for Jesus.
Gary
I’m certain Revelation did have meaning to people of that time. That doesn’t mean it has nothing to say to us.Hi John was the last of the decipals of that group,he was 90 when he died and Polycarp and Ignatiuos helped him penn Rev.a few times to send to the other churches. I realy think that book was ment for these day’s,or why barther writing it at all?There are so many unbelievers today and some were believers. Nancy
![]()
I think that you have hit it right–if we are to read through these passages we find that there are only seven Churches being addressed (interestingly enough 7 is a very significan number); would Christ be ignoring all of the other communities or would only these 7 require His attention? I believe that Christ is speaking to the Church throughout time; the Church’s own history demonstrates that during various episodes of her existence she has behaved in the various manners depicted in Apocalypse 1:4 through 3:22.Hi Dan 86 But who is he talking to? who was there at the time? or was it for the latter day’s and if it was for the latter days then REV. must not have happened yet? Most people think it is all symbolic and it only pertained to those day’s. Nancy God Bless
The Jews refused to let Jesus name be spoken so at the Church’s infancy Jesus’ disciples were simply known as the Way or those who followed the Way (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14,22); it was only after Saul’s conversion and mission (1 year or so later) that Christ’s disciples were called Christians (Acts 11:25-26).You know I think you people are right,was there a church before Peter? If not then what was the group that the 12 and 70 and all the others were in called?Any documentation at all? How about history before that was the Monks from the Orient first?Anybody? Nancy Thank You![]()
Of course the Apocalypse means something today. I think of it this way. The book of Daniel is prophetic concerning the Babylonian exile. (Dan 9:27; 12:11) describes the desolating abomination of Antiochus and the Temple.Hi John was the last of the decipals of that group,he was 90 when he died and Polycarp and Ignatiuos helped him penn Rev.a few times to send to the other churches. I realy think that book was ment for these day’s,or why barther writing it at all?There are so many unbelievers today and some were believers. Nancy
![]()
Of course the Apocalypse means something today. I think of it this way. The book of Daniel is prophetic concerning the Babylonian exile. (Dan 9:27; 12:11) describes the desolating abomination of Antiochus and the Temple.
Jesus refers to Daniel’s desolating abomination (Mat 24:15) six hundred years later applying it to the second Temple (70 A.D.). So, does it apply to these days? YES! (even if a third Temple is never built).
Suppose the first 19 chapters of Rev are fulfilled in the first century. Then suppose there is a very long time (1,000 years) Christ reigns from his kingdom in heaven (Rev 20:4) and his kingdom the Church. Now imagine (Rev 20:7) starts next week. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison.
It is entirely possible that everything in the first 19 chapters repeats in (Rev 20:7-10) somehow. Who knows if this will happen. If you are following me this far and want me to continue, let me know (Or I would probably sit hear and never stop typing).
Hi Ryan if that is so then Rev.:12 would be invalid,an I cannot see the Lord repeating anything. He will not destroy the earth by water again,and if satan was in prison there would have been peace for a thousand years and that hasn’t happened yet has it?And why would only Rev. repeat and not any other book? Also Rev.:13:7-10 hasn’t happened yet where the whole world was captive and forced to take the Mark (but it’s going to) Love of Christ Nancy
Peace![]()