This matters because Shincheonji often argues that even if the Old Testament trumpet imagery refers to alarms or judgment, the New Testament “reveals” a deeper, fulfilled meaning where the trumpet becomes a person who proclaims revelation. Passages such as 1 Corinthians 14:8, 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 1 Corinthians 15:52, and Revelation 8–11 are used to support this shift. The following analysis will show that these verses do not redefine the trumpet as a human messenger. Instead, they intensify its original function. In the New Testament, the trumpet is consistently tied to God’s direct action, the return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and heavenly judgment — realities that explicitly exclude human intermediaries. Far from supporting “trumpet = messenger,” the New Testament closes that door entirely by locating the trumpet firmly in the realm of divine initiative, not human authority.

In 1 Corinthians 14:8, Paul writes, “For if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who will prepare for battle?” This statement appears within a sustained argument about clarity and intelligibility in Christian worship. Paul draws on a familiar military image: a trumpet blast signals soldiers to act, but only if the sound is clear and recognizable. The emphasis of the analogy is not on who blows the trumpet, but on whether the sound communicates anything meaningful. An unclear signal fails its purpose because it does not prompt a proper response.

The context of the passage makes Paul’s intent unmistakable. The Corinthian church was misusing the gift of tongues by speaking in ways that others could not understand, turning worship into confusion rather than edification (1 Corinthians 14:6–12). Paul contrasts unintelligible speech with prophecy and teaching that can be understood and therefore builds up the church. Within this argument, the trumpet functions as a metaphor for speech. An “uncertain sound” represents confusing or meaningless language, while a clear trumpet represents intelligible instruction that enables listeners to respond appropriately. Paul is addressing communication effectiveness, not prophetic identity or eschatological fulfillment.

Shincheonji’s claim fails because it misreads a rhetorical comparison as a symbolic code. Paul is not redefining the trumpet as a human messenger or introducing a hidden layer of prophetic meaning. He is using a common analogy to illustrate why clarity matters in corporate worship. The subject matter is pastoral instruction, not Revelation, end-times prophecy, or a chain of divine revelation through a specific individual. To turn Paul’s metaphor into evidence for a future “trumpet messenger” is to impose an entirely foreign category onto the text. First Corinthians 14:8 teaches that speech in the church must be clear and edifying. It does not support the idea that a trumpet represents a person who reveals hidden truth, and it offers no foundation for identifying the trumpet in Revelation with a human messenger.

Shincheonji’s interpretation fails because it requires a complete inversion of Paul’s argument. By redefining the “last trumpet” as a human messenger revealing fulfillment, SCJ turns a cosmic, supernatural event into a sermon. By redefining resurrection as “understanding revelation,” they replace the physical transformation of the body with cognitive enlightenment. By redefining “mystery” (μυστήριον) as secret knowledge given to a modern leader, they sever the term from Paul’s consistent usage, where it refers to God’s redemptive plan revealed in Christ (Ephesians 3:4–6; Colossians 1:26–27). The result is not a reinterpretation of 1 Corinthians 15, but a denial of its central claim. Paul’s gospel stands or falls on the bodily resurrection of the dead. Any system that allegorizes this hope replaces Christ’s power with human authority and undermines the very foundation of the Christian faith.

1 Thessalonians 4:16

“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.”

First Thessalonians 4:16 presents one of the clearest descriptions of Christ’s return in the New Testament, and its language leaves no room for symbolic reinterpretation. The subject of the passage is explicit: “the Lord Himself.” The action is equally clear: He “will descend from heaven.” Paul then lists the accompanying signs — a cry of command, the voice of an archangel, and the trumpet of God — all of which belong unmistakably to the realm of the supernatural. The result of this event is not instruction, enlightenment, or organizational change, but resurrection: “the dead in Christ will rise first.” Every element of the verse points to divine initiative and cosmic intervention, not human mediation.

The context of the passage confirms this reading. Paul is writing to Thessalonian believers who were anxious about fellow Christians who had died before Christ’s return. His purpose is pastoral and consoling, not speculative or symbolic. He assures them that death does not exclude believers from Christ’s coming kingdom, because God Himself will act decisively to raise the dead. The genre is apostolic eschatological teaching, grounded in the historic Christian hope of bodily resurrection. Within this framework, “the trumpet of God” functions as a divine summons, calling the dead to life and marking the moment of Christ’s visible return. This imagery echoes earlier biblical theophanies, such as the trumpet at Sinai announcing God’s presence (Exodus 19:16–19) and the “great trumpet” gathering God’s people in Isaiah 27:13. In every case, the trumpet accompanies God’s direct action, not the speech of a human figure.

Shincheonji’s interpretation collapses because it contradicts the explicit claims of the text. Paul does not say that Jesus works invisibly through a promised pastor, nor does he describe an ongoing spiritual process. He says “the Lord Himself will descend,” and he ties that descent to the physical resurrection of the dead. Recasting the trumpet as a human messenger replaces a one-time, cosmic act with organizational teaching and strips the passage of its comforting purpose. Paul’s entire argument is built on the certainty of Christ’s personal, visible return and the resurrection it brings. To substitute that hope with a sermon delivered by a man is to erase the very promise Paul is affirming. First Thessalonians 4:16 proclaims the supernatural return of Jesus Christ — the climax of redemptive history — and the trumpet of God announces His reign, not the authority of a human intermediary.

Scripture consistently uses the term “mystery” (mystērion) to describe God’s redemptive plan revealed in Christ, not secret information disclosed through a later individual. Paul speaks of “the mystery of His will” as God’s purpose to unite all things in Christ (Ephesians 1:9–10), a mystery once hidden but now made known through the gospel (Romans 16:25–26; Colossians 1:26–27). In this light, the “mystery of God” being finished in Revelation 10:7 refers to the consummation of that same redemptive plan as Christ’s kingdom is fully revealed. Shincheonji’s claim fails because it redefines “mystery” as new knowledge, inserts a human figure where the text names a heavenly angel, and relocates a supernatural heavenly announcement into an earthly organizational fulfillment. Revelation 10:7 does not predict the appearance of a Promised Pastor. It announces that God’s work in Christ, long proclaimed by the prophets, is about to reach its final and complete fulfillment.

The literary and theological context reinforces this reading. Revelation 8 follows the opening of the seventh seal, where the prayers of the saints rise before God and are answered with judgment poured out from heaven (8:3–5). The trumpet judgments that follow function as divine responses to those prayers. Genre-wise, this is apocalyptic symbolism—vivid imagery communicating real divine judgment rather than hidden instruction. The trumpets announce partial judgments meant to warn the world before the final consummation at the seventh trumpet (11:15). The imagery is intentionally rooted in the Exodus plagues. Hail and fire recall the seventh plague on Egypt (Exodus 9:23–25), while blood echoes the first plague when the Nile was turned to blood (Exodus 7:20–21). The repeated use of “one-third” signifies restraint. God is judging, but not yet destroying completely, leaving space for repentance.

Shincheonji’s interpretation fails at every interpretive level. By redefining the seven angels as pastors or eras of testimony, they override the text’s explicit identification of heavenly beings. By redefining the trumpets as preaching events, they strip the imagery of its judgmental force and sever its connection to the Exodus. By treating hail, fire, and blood as “spiritual events” within church history, they replace supernatural, heaven-initiated judgment with organizational storytelling. This approach collapses apocalyptic genre into allegory, distorts basic lexical meaning, and inverts the narrative direction of the text. Revelation 8:6–7 depicts God acting from heaven through His angels to judge the earth. It does not describe human messengers proclaiming revelation, but divine intervention warning the world before final judgment.

Revelation 9:13–15 describes the sixth trumpet judgment in explicitly heavenly and supernatural terms. The subject of the action is the sixth angel, one of the seven angels who stand before God. When the trumpet is blown, a voice issues from the four horns of the golden altar before God, giving a command. This detail is crucial: the instruction originates from God’s presence, not from any human initiative on earth. The command is to release four angels bound at the great river Euphrates, and once released, these angels bring about catastrophic judgment, resulting in the death of a third of mankind. The scale, setting, and outcome of the event are unmistakably cosmic and apocalyptic. There is no reference to a man, a preacher, or an organization. Everything unfolds in the heavenly realm and affects the world through divine judgment.

Interpreting the passage within its literary and theological context confirms this reading. Revelation 9 is part of the broader trumpet sequence in chapters 8–11, which depicts partial judgments that precede the final consummation. These judgments are warnings, not revelations of new doctrine. The imagery of the Euphrates draws on Israel’s historical memory, where the river marked the boundary from which major enemies such as Assyria and Babylon invaded. The four angels bound at the Euphrates represent destructive powers held in restraint until God’s appointed time, emphasizing divine sovereignty over both the timing and extent of judgment. The reference to “the hour, the day, the month, and the year” underscores that nothing happens by chance. Judgment is precisely governed by God. The repeated fraction “a third” signals limitation and restraint, showing that these acts are warnings intended to lead humanity to repentance rather than immediate total destruction.

Shincheonji’s interpretation fails because it requires a complete reversal of the text’s meaning and purpose. By redefining the sixth angel as a human messenger and the four bound angels as evangelists or pastors, SCJ replaces a scene of cosmic judgment with an institutional narrative. By transferring the divine voice from the heavenly altar to a human mouthpiece, they shift authority away from God and toward a man. Most decisively, by redefining death and destruction as “spiritual enlightenment” or internal division, they nullify the moral weight of the passage. Revelation 9 itself explains the purpose of these judgments: despite them, humanity still refuses to repent (9:20–21). The sixth trumpet is therefore a warning of divine wrath and a call to repentance, not a description of progressive revelation through human teachers. The trumpet sequence consistently portrays God acting from heaven to judge the world, and it culminates not in the rise of a new messenger, but in the declaration of Christ’s eternal reign from heaven in Revelation 11:15.