Eschatological and Millennial Theories and their problems.

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
Having no theological construct to force it into, I'd go Literal.

Something seems backwards in this statement ... when you understand a passage literally, your resulting theological construct will be a certain one; when you understand the passage figuratively, your resulting theological construct will be a different one.

Now, isn't the real question to answer this: Did the author communicate in a passage by way of literal statements or did the author communicate in a passage by way of figures of speech?
The correct understanding will be according to how the author communicated, yes? In other words, taking a literal passage to be figurative would produce just as false an understanding as taking a figurative passage literally ...

dct112685

@Dave_L said:

@davidtaylorjr said:

@Dave_L said:

@davidtaylorjr said:

@Dave_L said:
The serpent is a symbol for Satan in this passage. “He seized the dragon—the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan—and tied him up for a thousand years.” (Revelation 20:2)

With a physical chain?

One might reasonably ask how a spiritual being can be bound with a p 352 physical chain. But there is no indication as to the exact nature of the chain. While a literal event is portrayed, the precise nature of the chain that binds Satan remains unknown.

Paige Patterson, Revelation, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 39, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2012), 351–352.

This is exactly what I'm saying. God does not fulfill the symbol with the symbol. he fulfills it with what the symbol represents. Or you're gonna have red dragons circling the earth in outer space....

That doesn't prove your point at all and is not what you are saying. I'm saying this is a literal event, we just don't know what type of chain it is. Do you think the book of life is a literal physical book? Do you think the streets of gold are literal streets? How can spirits walk on them or be a part of them? You assume way too much.

Why would John recognize the chain as being a chain if it was not?

Was it a physical chain? A supernatural chain? We don't know.

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang said:
I am surprised that you cannot notice the use of such figurative language. When you read the book of Rev more of it should be obvious ..

Sorry to surprise you.

I've not thought of Matthew 24 as apocalyptic in a manner akin to Revelation for a couple of reasons:

• Revelation presents John's unsolicited vision, whereas Matthew 24 reports Jesus' response to the disciples question about the timing of his return. I don't expect to find apocalyptic imagery in conversations. I expect to find it in monologues, treatises, prophetic utterances, etc.
• Revelation far more clearly showcases classic apocalypticism's dramatic confrontation of good and evil that ends in evil's final destruction, whereas Matthew 24 highlights the Son of Man's return as the inauguration of a winnowing process which in places is no more destructive to those not chosen than their being left behind (Matthew 24.40-41).

I understand and respect your view that in Matthew 24 Jesus speaks in "figurative language." But the fact that he answers a specific question AND then begins the next part of his soliloquy to the disciples with parables very clearly intended not to convey predictions of specific events (Matthew 25.1ff.) leads me to conclude Jesus does not mean his Matthew 24 imagery figuratively, that he intends the vision of the Son of Man returning on the clouds to be taken literally.

As for OT use of such "apocalyptic language", try Isa 13 ... for example

Thanks for a helpful example. Notice, however, that Isaiah 13 presents another unsolicited prophetic vision; it's not a word that responds to someone's inquiry.

Dave_L

@davidtaylorjr said:

@Dave_L said:

@davidtaylorjr said:

@Dave_L said:

@davidtaylorjr said:

@Dave_L said:
The serpent is a symbol for Satan in this passage. “He seized the dragon—the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan—and tied him up for a thousand years.” (Revelation 20:2)

With a physical chain?

One might reasonably ask how a spiritual being can be bound with a p 352 physical chain. But there is no indication as to the exact nature of the chain. While a literal event is portrayed, the precise nature of the chain that binds Satan remains unknown.

Paige Patterson, Revelation, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 39, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2012), 351–352.

This is exactly what I'm saying. God does not fulfill the symbol with the symbol. he fulfills it with what the symbol represents. Or you're gonna have red dragons circling the earth in outer space....

That doesn't prove your point at all and is not what you are saying. I'm saying this is a literal event, we just don't know what type of chain it is. Do you think the book of life is a literal physical book? Do you think the streets of gold are literal streets? How can spirits walk on them or be a part of them? You assume way too much.

Why would John recognize the chain as being a chain if it was not?

Was it a physical chain? A supernatural chain? We don't know.

Since Satan is a spirit and the chain binds him, it must represent something spiritual that binds him. ““I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.” (Matthew 18:18)

In this sense the Church binds Satan and he cannot hide behind the gates of hell Matthew 16:18 to protect himself.

C Mc

B> @Dave_L said:

Thanks, David. I believe the 1000 years could be interpreted symbolically because the Serpent is a symbol. The Chain is obviously symbolic, The Angel holding the chain would no doubt be symbolic since the chain is. Satan is spirit and a physical chain could never bind him, etc.

Please see Rev 20:2-- Now, tell me, Who is the Serpent? Is he real or not? Satan is a fallen angel, another angel can't hold another angel? Can another man or group of men restraint a man? Think about it. Wouldn't you agree that Satan is real and the chain is symbolic?

What is this symbolic Chain? The answer in the condition of the earth at the time of 1,000 years (rather real or symbolic). So, describe it. CM

GaoLu

Why on earth must your chain be figurative or symbolic? Because your theology denies the truth of God's Word, Satan and demons can very possibly have very real bodies that are bound with very real chains. If God didn't mean what He said or is hiding something from us, we shall know that soon enough. Meanwhile, take Him at His word. If the chain isn't real then probably you can't believe the Bible--which we know some here openly state. If only the chain is figurative, then God will reveal such details when we get there. But to say the whole thing is apocalyptic literature and figurative is to leave all truth and the purpose of Revelation up for grabs.

If what has been said is true, much of the language is figurative, then by the same wild assumptions, there is no 1000 years, no angel, no judgment, no hell, no heaven. All quite convenient for unbelievers convicted of sin. There is no life, no reign of Christ, no resurrection, no beast, no one persecuted, no souls.

Someone is lying or badly duped.

C Mc

Gentlemen,
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. There remain several basic understandings we must flesh out. I have compiled a list. A no-brainer understanding in that the Bible there are all kinds of literature in the Bible: **story or narrative, law, history, genealogy, poetry, prophecy**, song, gospel, parable, letter, and so forth.

When it comes to rightly understanding Rev 20 and the 1,000 years, at minimal, we must all accept without decent. Do we agree:

1. The Bible is fully inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy.
2. The Bible reveals to us the way of salvation, both before and after we accept it. As the psalmist puts it, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Ps. 119:105).
3. Holy men wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
4. There is unity in the Bible between the OT and NT.
5. The Book of Revelation (last of the Bible) is a prophetic book, symbols, and literal languages.
6. The Books of Daniel (OT) and Revelation (NT) share languages, words, imagery, and expressions.
7. The book of Revelation is a book of contrasts.
8. The Book of Revelation was written in the AD 90s by John on the Isle of Patmos.
9. Jesus is the exact image of God’s Person (Heb. 1:3). Thus there is a sense in which Jesus Christ is the “Word” (John 1:1). That makes the written word in the Bible a reflection or commentary on Jesus, with the Old Testament pointing forward to Him and the New Testament featuring His life and ministry.
10. Jesus Christ is the center of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. He is the Word, God’s revelation of Himself made human.
11. There are two types of prophecy-- Classical and Apocalyptic (e.g., Daniel and Revelation).
12. Revelation 20 mentions the destruction of Satan?
13. Believe that the canon of Scripture closed with the book of Revelation".
14. The Old Testament Scriptures and the New Testament Gospels are on the same level of authority. [See-- 1 Timothy 5:18, Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; and in 2 Peter 3:15, 16].
15. John writes the most graphic portrayal of God's wrath in the New Testament-the book of Revelation.
16. The book of Revelation shows the roles of both Christ and His Father, and see the relationship that exists between the theocentric and the Christocentric?
17. The role of Christ is central to the book of Revelation. Rev 1:1 says that the book is "the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev 1:4; 4:2,9-10; 5:1,7,13; 6:16; 7:10,15; 12:5; 14:5; 19:4; 21:5; 22:1,3).
18. The book of Revelation was given by God to Jesus Christ (1:1). All the information given in the book originated with God Himself. It was given to Christ so that He might show His servants what must shortly happen. Jesus gave the message to John as a revelation by sending His angel (1:1).
19. “The structure of the book of Revelation... shows the principle of repetition ruling out the idea of “a continuous or straight-line reading”through the chapters as though they represent chronological events fulfillment. DO WE ALL AGREE? CM

SOURCES:

• -- Steve Moyise. The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation, JSNTSup 115 (Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995)

• -- Craig C. Broyles, "Interpreting the Old Testament: Principles and Steps," in Interpreting the Old Testament: A Guide for Exegesis, ed. Craig C. Broyles (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001).

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
If God didn't mean what He said or is hiding something from us, we shall know that soon enough.

What do you mean with "didn't mean what He said?" ... are you saying that using a figure of speech falls in the category of "doesn't mean what He said"?

Sure, when Jesus said "I am the door", he certainly didn't mean that he was a literal door, such as is found at the entrance of a house, etc .... but he most certainly did mean what he said !!

Meanwhile, take Him at His word.

Only possible when you correctly distinguish and understand where Scripture is meant to be understood literally and where Scripture employs a figure of speech. IF you got that wrong, your are NOT able to take Him at His word, because you do not understand His word in the first place.

If what has been said is true, much of the language is figurative, then by the same wild assumptions, there is no 1000 years, no angel, no judgment, no hell, no heaven.

I would say that your assumption about this must be incorrect in light of the truth that God's Word uses figures of speech as well as literal language ... and figures of speech are NOT AT ALL something which leave things any more to "wild assumptions" and false teachings than a wrong understanding of literal text might do

All quite convenient for unbelievers convicted of sin. There is no life, no reign of Christ, no resurrection, no beast, no one persecuted, no souls.

Someone is lying or badly duped.

Perhaps the person who has no good knowledge about the use of figures of speech used in the Bible or in general? Scripture communicates with language ... not understanding and applying basic rules and uses of language will easily result in ignorance and false ideas.

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang said:
Sure, when Jesus said "I am the door", he certainly didn't mean that he was a literal door, such as is found at the entrance of a house, etc .... but he most certainly did mean what he said !!

Of course, yes.

Meanwhile, take Him at His word.

Only possible when you correctly distinguish and understand where Scripture is meant to be understood literally and where Scripture employs a figure of speech. IF you got that wrong, your are NOT able to take Him at His word, because you do not understand His word in the first place.

Your caution applies to all sides in any interpretative dispute, Wolfgang. In your and my exchange about Matthew 24, your caution also tells YOU (Wolfgang) that if YOU misapprehend the use of figurative language, YOU "do not understand (the) word in the first place." [Confession: I happen not to think that's clearly true in all cases, but I call your attention to the multi-dimensional ramifications of your point of view.]

Someone is lying or badly duped.

Perhaps the person who has no good knowledge about the use of figures of speech used in the Bible or in general? Scripture communicates with language ... not understanding and applying basic rules and uses of language will easily result in ignorance and false ideas.

To this I offer the same basic observation as above, changing only the quoted references.

We ALL can err when engaging Bible texts, which means that it's in our selfish interests for our predictions of the outcomes of interpretive errors to reflect humility and grace. It's another distillation of Jesus' "log-" and "splinter-"laden eyes teaching.

[Deleted User]

@Bill_Coley said:

@Wolfgang said:
Only possible when you correctly distinguish and understand where Scripture is meant to be understood literally and where Scripture employs a figure of speech. IF you got that wrong, your are NOT able to take Him at His word, because you do not understand His word in the first place.

Your caution applies to all sides in any interpretative dispute, Wolfgang.

Sorry ... I was using the "you" in the general sense of "one / someone" ("only possible when one correctly distinguishes ...."). but obviously this was not made sufficiently clear. Definitely, what I stated applies to me just as to anyone else.

Perhaps the person who has no good knowledge about the use of figures of speech used in the Bible or in general? Scripture communicates with language ... not understanding and applying basic rules and uses of language will easily result in ignorance and false ideas.

To this I offer the same basic observation as above, changing only the quoted references.

One of the major lacks I have noticed over decades of communicating and discussing with other people biblical topics etc. is the lack of a knowledge regarding figures of speech and their use in the Scriptures. Most seem to only be aware of a rather limited number of figures of speech (for some, metaphor and parable are the only ones they could name). In addition, most seem ignorant about the reason and purpose for the use of figures of speech and - unfortunately - many even think that figures of speech are brought into the picture by readers to obscure the meaning of a word or expression.

When one has no idea about what a figure of speech is and what types of figures of speech exist and are used, it is highly unlikely or impossible to correctly understand a passage which involves the use of figures of speech, aside from some obvious ones ... such as the "I am the door" expression which probably all will understand that it is not about a literal "door"; however, some will claim the expression gives a "spiritual meaning", thereby confusing "spiritual" with "figurative" ...

I'd suggest to anyone interested in learning more about the field to have a look at the book Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger (available in logos format at https://www.logos.com/product/1951/figures-of-speech-used-in-the-bible-explained-and-illustrated )

GaoLu

Wolfgang, yes Jesus uses figures of speech as do other writers. We all know with no confusion what Jesus meant when He says, "I am the door." When He says He will bind the devil, we all have a pretty good idea what he means. When He says there will be a1000 year reign, we all know just what He means. Confusing such matters is really not a problem. Oh, a rare individual might miss something here or there, but probably not. What happens is people come up with really bad theology and then cherry pick words or phrases out of context to support their bad theology.

Whenever someone starts saying, "Oh, that was a cultural issue," or "that is just a figure of speech" when it normally isn't, we pretty much all know the truth. I really don't think people are duped that much. I think they choose to believe what they want to fit their personal agenda.

I mean, we have Bill going on saying Jesus was wrong. Maybe you say that too. A mild surprise at most when we consider 2 Cor 5:16:

"So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer."

The world sees Christ as it sees any person. A wise lunatic at best. Once the Holy Spirit moves in our hearts, we are changed from night to day like Paul was. Paul declared himself spiritually aborted. Still-born perhaps. Dead. When he was born again, everything, I mean everything changed and he knew Jesus.

[Deleted User]

@GaoLu said:
What happens is people come up with really bad theology and then cherry pick words or phrases out of context to support their bad theology.

I've seen it more the other way around => people cherry pick words and phrases out of context and come up with the bad theology, because had they not taken things out of context, chances would be good that they would have had good theology

Whenever someone starts saying, "Oh, that was a cultural issue," or "that is just a figure of speech" when it normally isn't, we pretty much all know the truth.

I would doubt that as experience (even here) has shown me the lack of knowledge in the field of figures of speech on numerous occasions and regarding numerous topics.
Your statement about "that is JUST a figure of speech" indicates to me that someone making such a statement seems to regard something using a figure of speech to be less important than what is stated in a literal manner ... when in truth the opposite is true. Figures of speech are generally always used for the purpose of adding emphasis to what is said.

I mean, we have Bill going on saying Jesus was wrong. Maybe you say that too.

?? from where in my writings would you come up with such an idea?

Dave_L

@C_M_ said:
B> @Dave_L said:

Thanks, David. I believe the 1000 years could be interpreted symbolically because the Serpent is a symbol. The Chain is obviously symbolic, The Angel holding the chain would no doubt be symbolic since the chain is. Satan is spirit and a physical chain could never bind him, etc.

Please see Rev 20:2-- Now, tell me, Who is the Serpent? Is he real or not? Satan is a fallen angel, another angel can't hold another angel? Can another man or group of men restraint a man? Think about it. Wouldn't you agree that Satan is real and the chain is symbolic?

What is this symbolic Chain? The answer in the condition of the earth at the time of 1,000 years (rather real or symbolic). So, describe it. CM

Thanks CM. It's this simple.

• The angel = messenger

• the chain = the message (gospel)

• the 1000 years = the church age until the last of the elect (names written in the book of life) come in

• Satan loosed = the message falls on deaf ears and the world assails the Church from all quarters.

GaoLu

@Wolfgang said:
?? from where in my writings would you come up with such an idea?

Not from yours.

C Mc

@C_M_ said:
Gentlemen,
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. There remain several basic understandings we must flesh out. I have compiled a list. A no-brainer understanding in that the Bible there are all kinds of literature in the Bible: story or narrative, law, history, genealogy, poetry, prophecy, song, gospel, parable, letter, and so forth.
When it comes to rightly understanding Rev 20 and the 1,000 years, at minimal, we must all accept without decent. Do we agree:
1. The Bible is fully inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy...
4. There is unity in the Bible between the OT and NT.
5. The Book of Revelation (last of the Bible) is a prophetic book, symbols, and literal languages.
6. The Books of Daniel (OT) and Revelation (NT) share languages, words, imagery, and expressions.
7. The book of Revelation is a book of contrasts.
8. The Book of Revelation was written in the AD 90s by John on the Isle of Patmos...
10. Jesus Christ is the center of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. He is the Word, God’s revelation of Himself made human.
11. There are two types of prophecy-- Classical and Apocalyptic (e.g., Daniel and Revelation).
12. Revelation 20 mentions the destruction of Satan?
15. John writes the most graphic portrayal of God's wrath in the New Testament-the book of Revelation.
16. The book of Revelation shows the roles of both Christ and His Father, and see the relationship that exists between the theocentric and the Christocentric?...
18. The book of Revelation was given by God to Jesus Christ (1:1). All the information given in the book originated with God Himself. It was given to Christ so that He might show His servants what must shortly happen. Jesus gave the message to John as a revelation by sending His angel (1:1).
19. “The structure of the book of Revelation... shows the principle of repetition ruling out the idea of “a continuous or straight-line reading”through the chapters as though they represent chronological events fulfillment. DO WE ALL AGREE? CM

There is judgment before the 2nd coming of Christ. No reward or punishment without a judgment. The parable of Matt. 25:31-46 speaks of this. The judgment in this parable took place during the millennium [a period of one thousand years.]. (Rev. 20:11- 15).

In view of this, Matt 24 & 25 go together. Never should one be preached without the other:

• Matthew 24-- tells us Jesus is coming.
• Matthew 25-- tells us how to prepare. Jesus plainly states in Matthew 25 that when we serve others, we are actually having moments with Him.
• Matthew 25:31-46 (Separating the sheep from the goats).
• Matthew 25:40-45 (To the extent that you did it to 
one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me). Jesus summarized His discourse by saying: "Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me" (Matt. 25:40).

In Matthew 25, Jesus spoke of commendation and condemnation in the end times. Among the actions for which the righteous were commended was “I was in prison, and you came to me” (Matt. 25:36).

There are two sides to this parable: Commendation ---- Condemnation

1. Commendation: The righteous asked. Condemnation: The unrighteous (not doing the same)
2. Commendation: “When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?” (Matt 25.39).
3. Commendation: The King answered: The King, of course, answered, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me” (v. 40).
    -- This Bible text has become known as the “in-as-much” passage."
    -- The main idea here, advocates argue, is that as long as the church does this type of work, its mission would have been accomplished.
   Condemnation: This group failed to live like Jesus. They had no consideration, compassion or thoughtfulness of others— “out of sight out of mind” mentality.
4. Commendation: They are unaware that they have done anything worthy of praise. In short, they were not trying to “work” their way into the kingdom.
   Condemnation: Those who were condemned, are not judged for any great evil, but for failing to do good.

This parable helps us to understand the 1,000 years. If interested, stay tuned...CM

Dave_L

@C_M_ said:

@C_M_ said:
Gentlemen,
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. There remain several basic understandings we must flesh out. I have compiled a list. A no-brainer understanding in that the Bible there are all kinds of literature in the Bible: story or narrative, law, history, genealogy, poetry, prophecy, song, gospel, parable, letter, and so forth.
When it comes to rightly understanding Rev 20 and the 1,000 years, at minimal, we must all accept without decent. Do we agree:
1. The Bible is fully inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy...
4. There is unity in the Bible between the OT and NT.
5. The Book of Revelation (last of the Bible) is a prophetic book, symbols, and literal languages.
6. The Books of Daniel (OT) and Revelation (NT) share languages, words, imagery, and expressions.
7. The book of Revelation is a book of contrasts.
8. The Book of Revelation was written in the AD 90s by John on the Isle of Patmos...
10. Jesus Christ is the center of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. He is the Word, God’s revelation of Himself made human.
11. There are two types of prophecy-- Classical and Apocalyptic (e.g., Daniel and Revelation).
12. Revelation 20 mentions the destruction of Satan?
15. John writes the most graphic portrayal of God's wrath in the New Testament-the book of Revelation.
16. The book of Revelation shows the roles of both Christ and His Father, and see the relationship that exists between the theocentric and the Christocentric?...
18. The book of Revelation was given by God to Jesus Christ (1:1). All the information given in the book originated with God Himself. It was given to Christ so that He might show His servants what must shortly happen. Jesus gave the message to John as a revelation by sending His angel (1:1).
19. “The structure of the book of Revelation... shows the principle of repetition ruling out the idea of “a continuous or straight-line reading”through the chapters as though they represent chronological events fulfillment. DO WE ALL AGREE? CM

There is judgment before the 2nd coming of Christ. No reward or punishment without a judgment. The parable of Matt. 25:31-46 speaks of this. The judgment in this parable took place during the millennium [a period of one thousand years.]. (Rev. 20:11- 15).

In view of this, Matt 24 & 25 go together. Never should one be preached without the other:

• Matthew 24-- tells us Jesus is coming.
• Matthew 25-- tells us how to prepare. Jesus plainly states in Matthew 25 that when we serve others, we are actually having moments with Him.
• Matthew 25:31-46 (Separating the sheep from the goats).
• Matthew 25:40-45 (To the extent that you did it to 
one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me). Jesus summarized His discourse by saying: "Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me" (Matt. 25:40).

In Matthew 25, Jesus spoke of commendation and condemnation in the end times. Among the actions for which the righteous were commended was “I was in prison, and you came to me” (Matt. 25:36).

There are two sides to this parable: Commendation ---- Condemnation

1. Commendation: The righteous asked. Condemnation: The unrighteous (not doing the same)
2. Commendation: “When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?” (Matt 25.39).
3. Commendation: The King answered: The King, of course, answered, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me” (v. 40).
    -- This Bible text has become known as the “in-as-much” passage."
    -- The main idea here, advocates argue, is that as long as the church does this type of work, its mission would have been accomplished.
   Condemnation: This group failed to live like Jesus. They had no consideration, compassion or thoughtfulness of others— “out of sight out of mind” mentality.
4. Commendation: They are unaware that they have done anything worthy of praise. In short, they were not trying to “work” their way into the kingdom.
   Condemnation: Those who were condemned, are not judged for any great evil, but for failing to do good.

This parable helps us to understand the 1,000 years. If interested, stay tuned...CM

Please share, I have some thoughts on this and would appreciate hearing yours.

[Deleted User]

@C_M_ said:
When it comes to rightly understanding Rev 20 and the 1,000 years, at minimal, we must all accept without decent. Do we agree:

1. The Bible is fully inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy.
2. The Bible reveals to us the way of salvation, both before and after we accept it. As the psalmist puts it, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Ps. 119:105).
3. Holy men wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
4. There is unity in the Bible between the OT and NT.

I agree with the above ...

5. The Book of Revelation (last of the Bible) is a prophetic book, symbols, and literal languages.

While I agree, I would however point out what I consider a rather important point: Being a "prophetic book" at the time of writing does NOT necessarily mean that it still is prophetic from our perspective as readers 2000 years later.

6. The Books of Daniel (OT) and Revelation (NT) share languages, words, imagery, and expressions.

I agree ...

7. The book of Revelation is a book of contrasts.

Not sure to what this refers and what it is supposed to mean

8. The Book of Revelation was written in the AD 90s by John on the Isle of Patmos.

I do not agree ... from the internal evidence of what is stated in the book, I tend to accept the earlier dating => in the 60iesAD, while John was on the isle of Patmos under Caesar Nero's reign (which is also attested to by a comment in an ancient Aramaic manuscript of the book

9. Jesus is the exact image of God’s Person (Heb. 1:3). Thus there is a sense in which Jesus Christ is the “Word” (John 1:1). That makes the written word in the Bible a reflection or commentary on Jesus, with the Old Testament pointing forward to Him and the New Testament featuring His life and ministry.
10. Jesus Christ is the center of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. He is the Word, God’s revelation of Himself made human.

What does this have to do with the topic at hand? I am not sure one can make such a "connection" between verses as is done here.

11. There are two types of prophecy-- Classical and Apocalyptic (e.g., Daniel and Revelation).

Not sure if I understand what is really meant with this distinction and how it relates to the topic here

12. Revelation 20 mentions the destruction of Satan?

Here I would caution to keep things in context and not to understand "Satan" as some kind of fallen super angel or what the term has been made to mean during later centuries.

13. Believe that the canon of Scripture closed with the book of Revelation".
14. The Old Testament Scriptures and the New Testament Gospels are on the same level of authority. [See-- 1 Timothy 5:18, Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; and in 2 Peter 3:15, 16].
15. John writes the most graphic portrayal of God's wrath in the New Testament-the book of Revelation.

I agree with these .... but also note again, context and overall scope of Scripture determines to what this pouring out of the wrath of God refers and who were the recipients of it

16. The book of Revelation shows the roles of both Christ and His Father, and see the relationship that exists between the theocentric and the Christocentric?

No clue what this is supposed to have to do with the topic

17. The role of Christ is central to the book of Revelation. Rev 1:1 says that the book is "the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev 1:4; 4:2,9-10; 5:1,7,13; 6:16; 7:10,15; 12:5; 14:5; 19:4; 21:5; 22:1,3).

Indeed ...

18. The book of Revelation was given by God to Jesus Christ (1:1). All the information given in the book originated with God Himself. It was given to Christ so that He might show His servants what must shortly happen. Jesus gave the message to John as a revelation by sending His angel (1:1).

Indeed ... and one should not put aside that the events revealed in the book are said to "MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS" ... same truth being reiterated also in Rev 22 at the end of the book.

19. “The structure of the book of Revelation... shows the principle of repetition ruling out the idea of “a continuous or straight-line reading”through the chapters as though they represent chronological events fulfillment. DO WE ALL AGREE? CM

I would think that the content and structure indicate that not all passages are written in chronological order ... thus, what is mentioned in the passages is not chronological either, but there are things which happened simultaneously, there are some passages, where the content refers back to before that which had just been mentioned, etc

Hope this helps ...