The Calvinist ESV: Revelation 5:9-10

#68 in "The Calvinist ESV" series, from the long post "A Random Verse That Destroys Calvinism (And 'Is the ESV a Calvinist Bible'?)":

#68: (I simplified this one but made it longer in the process.  Go figure.)  This one is about the end times.  In Revelation 5:9-10, the elders around the throne in heaven are singing about the people God has redeemed from the earth.

In the KJV, it says that Jesus "hast redeemed us to God by the blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. And hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall reign on the earth."  

But the ESV says: "... by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth."  

In the KJV, the elders identify themselves as part of the redeemed group, but the ESV (and many others) makes it sound like the elders are not necessarily part of that group.  So which is it, and does it matter?  

I think the identity of the elders is important for determining the timing of the rapture (the redemption of the Church) and the identity of the "elect" in Revelation.

And personally, I think the elders are part of the redeemed group.  But even if the word was "them" (there is debate about that), I don't think it would necessarily mean that the elders weren't part of that group.  "Us" would still be most fitting.

It would be like me standing before Jesus in the end, saying "Thank you for dying for my kids, for saving them."  In using the word "them," I'm not necessarily saying that only my kids were saved, that I wasn't.  "Us" would be most fitting, for Jesus saved me too, but I am just talking about "them" right now.

And I think the KJV gets across the truth that the elders are part of the redeemed group.  And since they are in heaven before the first seal of the tribulation starts, it's a pre-tribulation rapture.  (Notice that "redeemed" in Rev. 5:9 is past tense.  It's already been done - the "day of redemption" for the Church has happened, the rapture.  Eph. 4:30: "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.")  

The Greek word for "elders" here refers to humans, not angels.  These are human men around God's throne before the first seal opens (before the tribulation starts).  They have already been judged and rewarded, as evident by their crowns (Rev. 4:4 - crowns are promised to the faithful Philadelphia church in Rev. 3:12 and to those who long for the coming of the Lord in 2 Tim. 4:8)... and they are on thrones, which shows them to be "kings and priests," which is how John describes the Church in Rev. 1:6 and how the elders describe those redeemed from the earth in Rev. 5:10, proving that the elders are part of the Church.

The elders are the representatives of the Church, which was taken to "the Father's House (John 14:2-3), which I believe is the "New Jerusalem" that comes down out of heaven in Rev. 21.  And notice that Rev. 21:12-14 says that there are 24 names written on New Jerusalem's walls and foundations: 12 for the tribes of Israel and 12 for the apostles of the Lamb.  And how many elders are sitting on thrones around God's throne, wearing crowns?  That's right: 24.  

Also notice that Rev. 3:12 says this about the Philadelphia church, "I will write on him [who overcomes] the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven ..."  God promises the faithful church that He will write the name of the new Jerusalem on them.  He will write the name of their new home on them - the new home of the raptured church.  

All of this ties the elders to the Church to the New Jerusalem to the rapture.  And since the elders are already judged, rewarded, and around God's throne before the first seal of the tribulation opens, it's a pretribulation rapture, which also lines up with God's promise to keep the faithful Philadelphia church from the "hour of trial" that will come on everyone else after the rapture, Rev. 3:10.  There is no need for true Christians to be tested/tried about who they will side with - God or Satan - because they already made their decision to follow Jesus.  They already passed the test.  

And so when Revelation talks about "the elect" in the tribulation, it's not talking about Church-age believers but about those who became believers after the rapture, in the tribulation (the "great multitude" of Rev. 7:9-17, who will be taken out after the 6th seal).  People will still be coming to faith after the rapture, most likely as a result of seeing the rapture and realizing that Christians were right all along.  They will probably pay for their faith with their lives, but they will be saved.

And so what does all this have to do with Calvinism?

There are Calvinists who think that the rapture has to be post-trib because there are "elect" people on earth during the tribulation.  They reason that if God has predestined who will be saved - if He already saved them in eternity past - then all of "the elect" would have to be taken out at the same time.  And so if it was a pre-trib rapture, all the elect would be gone and there would be none left on earth during the tribulation.  But since Revelation refers to "the elect" in the tribulation, it must mean (according to Calvinists) that the rapture has to be post-trib.

I, however, believe that the elders are part of the redeemed Church group and that they were taken out in the pre-trib rapture.  And I believe that the new believers after the rapture are the "elect" spoken of in Revelation.  Anyone who chooses to put their faith in Jesus becomes part of "the elect."

But Calvinists get the idea of "election" wrong, which causes them to get the identity of "the elect" wrong, which causes them to mis-time the rapture.

The promise of being sealed by the Holy Spirit for the rapture, of being spared God's wrath during the tribulation, is a promise given only during the Church-age, to those who believe in Jesus before the tribulation starts.  

[See Eph. 1:13-14,4:30, 2 Cor. 1:21-22, Rev. 3:10.  And see 1 Thess. 1:10,5:9, which, according to Strong's concordance with Vine's Expository Dictionary, is not about eternal, heaven-or-hell, soul salvation, but it's about God promising to save believers from the end-times' wrath, the same kind of "salvation" we wait for in 1 Peter 1:5.  And for a huge blow to Calvinism: The "saved" in 2 Thess. 2:13 is also about God sparing believers from His end-times' wrath, not about eternal, heaven-or-hell, soul salvation: "... God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying word of the Spirit and through belief in the truth."  It's not saying "God chose you to be saved", that He chose who to save.  It's about God changing the method of salvation with that generation: from previously being through devotion to God (evidenced in their adherence to the Law) to now being through faith in Jesus (because Jesus didn't come to earth to die on the cross until that generation)... and, in particular, it's about God promising to save believers from end-times' wrath.  Basically, because we put our faith in Jesus, we will be saved from the wrath He will pour out on unbelievers in the tribulation.  2 Thess. 2:13 is not about God pre-picking who to save, but about God pre-deciding to spare believers - and anyone can believe - from the tribulation.]  

But people can still be saved during the tribulation.  They can still become part of God's "elect."  But since they missed the rapture, they will have to go through the tribulation.  

[And incidentally, from my understanding - thank you to Dr. Tony Evans for helping me see this - the Holy Spirit will work differently during the tribulation than He does during the Church age.  

In the Church age, He lives inside believers, sealing them for the day of redemption (the rapture).  

Ephesians 1:13-14: "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation.  Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession - to the praise of his glory." 

Ephesians 4:30: "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." 

But at the rapture, He is taken out of the earth, along with the Church.  

2 Thess. 2:7: "... but the one who now holds [the power of lawlessness] back will continue to do so until he is taken out of the way."

At that point - during the tribulation - He goes back to the Old Testament way of working in the earth and among people, by coming and going as He wants to, often based on how people live.  (This is why King Saul could have the Spirit at one time in his life, but then lose the Spirit later when he disobeyed God and drifted from Him.  He was not from the Church age, not sealed with the Holy Spirit inside him.)  This means that the tribulation believers will not have the Holy Spirit permanently inside them like the Church-age believers, but that they will have to remain faithful until the end to be saved. 

This helps explain some of the verses that are used by Christians who think we can lose our salvation.  Church-age believers cannot lose salvation because we are sealed by the Spirit as a deposit guaranteeing the redemption (rapture) that is to come.  

But tribulation believers are not given this seal, this guarantee.  They missed the rapture, and so there is no sealing "for the day of redemption" to be done.  They must cling to their faith, living in faithful obedience to God (refusing the Mark of the Beast), until the end in order to be saved.  And so they - and not Holy-Spirit-sealed Church-age believers - can lose their salvation.]  

Back to Calvinism's bad definition of "elect":

"Elect" doesn't mean that certain sinners are prepicked for salvation.  It's not talking about a group of people who were predestined to be saved, and who all need to be taken from the earth at the same time, post-tribulation.  

"Elect" simply means "chosen people" (but Calvinists read into it to make it mean "chosen for salvation," even though no verse ever specifies that).  It's not that God chooses who will believe, but that He chooses all who do believe for certain roles, responsibilities, or blessings.  Anyone who believes in Jesus - and anyone can - will become one of the "elect" and will be assigned certain roles, jobs, blessings.  Ephesians 2:10: "For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."  The "good works" that God wants all believers to do (all who become "in Christ" through faith in Jesus) were preplanned by God, not who gets saved.  

And that's a big difference.  How you define "the elect" will greatly affect your theology and your view of God, of who Jesus died for, of how we get saved, of who can be saved, and of when we will be raptured from the earth.

Conclusion: The elders are part of the redeemed group, the Church, and this redemption (rapture) happens before the tribulation starts.  Election is not about certain sinners being predestined to be saved, but about certain jobs/blessings being predestined for those who put their faith in Christ.  Such as, Church-age believers are elected ("chosen," which is all "election" means) for being saved from the end-times' wrath that God will pour out on those who resist Him in the tribulation.  But more people will come to faith during the tribulation (the "great multitude" of Rev. 7), and they will become part of God's elect and will be given the responsibilities/blessings of tribulation believers.  Church-age believers who are sealed with the Spirit for the rapture cannot lose salvation, but tribulation believers can because they are not sealed with the Spirit because the rapture already happened.

Time and time again, the KJV proves to be the more accurate translation.  At least in my opinion.

A note about the ESV vs King James:

            If you really want to get into the nitty-gritty, read these articles about the men who wrote the Greek texts that the ESV is based on: "Westcott and Hort: Translator's Beliefs" and "Westcott and Hort and the Greek Text."  The ESV is based on the RSV, which is based on the Greek Texts of these two men (who, it sounds like, rejected the infallibility of Scripture, despised evangelicals, questioned Jesus's divinity and an eternal hell, did not believe Genesis and the creation story was literal, affirmed Darwin and evolution, etc.), which is based on two corrupted manuscripts which differ from the majority of the more reliable manuscripts that the KJV is based on.  

            So when something says that the ESV has only made 6% changes, it means "from the RSV," meaning that it's 94% the same as the RSV it was based on, a translation which was based on two corrupted manuscripts that disagree with the majority of the manuscripts available.  It would be like if a journalist interviewed 100 people about an event ... and 95 of them said the exact same thing, but 5 told a different story ... and the journalist decided to side with the 5 and print their story as fact.  Raises some red flags, doesn't it?

            In the course of researching this issue, and after not knowing for decades what to think of the whole "which translation is most accurate" debate, I now side with the King James.  I mean, I have several other translations, and I think different ones are good for different reasons, such as readability, compare and contrast, to hear God's Word in a fresh way, etc.  But when having to decide which one is more reliable and accurate, especially considering the significant differences like those above, I have to side with the KJV (not the New King James, just the King James).  And I've never been more sure of it than now, after all this research.