OldCoot

Based on the extensive use of parenthesis in that post, it seemed to me like a copy and paste adventure. Either that, or it is just your favorite grammatical character. But those that think the Lord has no real purpose with the Jews or Jerusalem anymore, hold onto that thought. It isn't in my pay grade to worry about those that fit into that ideology. Folks are free to believe anything they want and fits their world view of things. It is between them and the One who made His promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Not my problem. I find the various signs intriguing, and possibly a forewarning of major changes coming on the horizon, kinda like a two minute warning in American football. I have been clearly in awe of the Ezekiel 4 / Leviticus 26 combination and how that relates to modern Israel and 1948. But even with all that, I try to keep my main focus on learning more about how the Lord pitches His tent with each of us and how we are to pitch our tents with him. I think that will have more to do with our appointment with future events than the signs do.

I also have a copy of Wuest's NT translation. It is a good supplement to the other translations I compare. Just a side note, even the translators really didn't quite bring the effect of the original Hebrew of that passage. If they had done their job and not worried about offending anyone, it would have been translated in the literal as "used menstrual cloths" and not "filthy rags". Used menstrual cloths has a much deeper punch on getting the idea across how nasty our supposed righteousness is. The Hebrew word behind "filthy" in the translations means menstrual flux or discharge. The Hebrew language can get pretty graphic and down to earth sometimes. The KJV had no problem using the word "piss" and it clearly means urine.

I believe you need to actually do your research. I didn't write a college level dissertation on the topic with footnotes and dozens of scripture references because most of what I stated is common knowledge with tons of more detailed information available to those who choose to find out for themselves. I didn't feel the need to reinvent the wheel. You choose not to accept it, not my problem. I usually don't waste a lot of time on those that try to push a Shabbat thing. If one chooses to adhere to the practice, great. If not, I don't worry about it either. But when someone wishes to make it is standard for everyone else, it usually evidences a legalistic mindset or worse, pride that they are somehow more superior to those who don't. Paul, a premier Pharisee trained in one of the most venerated schools of Jewish theology, Gamliel, had choice words for those that fit into those camps. And that is really what it comes down to. A far bigger problem than the Shabbat itself.

For those that are going to be sticklers on Sabbath keeping, then make sure you are doing it right! 1) Tithes and offering were done during the 6 other days at the Temple. The temple is closed on Shabbat. Paul himself said all collections should be done on the 1st of the week. So no offering plate should be passed and no cash handled or checks written on Shabbat. There is to be absolutely no buying an selling on Shabbat also. No going out to brunch/lunch at a local restaurant after the service or anytime from sunset Friday evening to sunset Saturday evening. 2) Not allowed to kindle a fire. Yes, that includes driving your car to church, or anywhere for that matter. An internal combustion engine is multiple fires being ignited. That is a no-no if one is going to adhere to the commandment of Sabbath keeping. And electric car might be ok, but that kinda falls into a gray area. 3) while not specifically laid out on scripture, inference can be made from several passages that the max allowed distance a person could walk on the Sabbath was about 2000 cubits, roughly 1000 yards without violating Shabbat. Unless one lives on the same block as the church, even walking to service could violate that one. 4) there are High Sabbaths, Sabbaths that do not fall on the 7th day. And one, specifically Yom Kippur, has a commandment in the law to afflict one's self (that is generally held to be fasting) for the entire 24 hrs. I wonder.... did the Sabbath keeping folks fast last Shabbat from Friday evening to Saturday evening since Yom Kippur was on Sept 30th? Yom Kippur is one of God's required appointed times, a required rehearsal, and a Sabbath (irregardless of what day it falls on) to teach us of Messiah. If one is going to get all on top of "keeping God's commandments", then one needs to keep all of them, especially those that pertain to Shabbat. After all, scripture says that if one fails to keep even the least commandment, they are guilty of violating the whole Torah (Law). And what is the least commandment? It has been generally held to be the commandment that one not take the eggs from the nest along with the mother bird. Deut 22:6. I just chuckle when I see a bunch of cars in the SDA parking lot on Shabbat. Those folks are like a poor marksman that can't even hit the target. Great people, but just caught up in themselves sometimes regarding such things as the Shabbat. Straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel. The only allowance for violating any of these was for the preservation of life.

It does seem rather goofy to suggest that someone preferring a particular translation is somehow divisive or evil. While I don't regularly use the KJV much anymore, I still like it. Like all translations, it does a particularly good job on some passages and falls on it's face in some passages. But it is overall a solid translation. I can't really say that any translation is "the best". They all have good points and bad points. I find, irregardless of translation, I have to do background word studies to get at the real meat of some passages. About the only translations that one can make some sort of claims about "evil" would be those out of bounds translations like the one from the Jw's Watchtower. That would definitely fall in the "corrupt" category.

I have generally held that many of the NT books were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. There are nuances in the Greek text that suggest that. However, we do not have much in the way of original Aramaic or Hebrew texts of the NT to come to any real conclusions on how passages should be translated. The plethora of textual evidence for the NT is in Greek. Until someone finds equivalent "dead sea scrolls" discovery of the NT in original Hebrew/Aramaic and conclusively documented from the 1st century, we are somewhat stuck with what we have. And while there could be remote variances in a Hebrew/Aramaic original from the Greek we have, the main principles of the faith probably will not be at risk. Just it would add some clarity to some passages.

I have come to view this daily interpersonal relationship with the Lord expressed best is the term "pitching one's tent with the Lord". We are to pitch our tent with Elohim and He pitches His tent with us. And we are considered righteous by the very same kind of faith Abraham exhibited.

What I find truly amazing is how such predictions get some folk's panties all in a wad. The last several meetings of the folks at our congregation, the topic of these supposed predictions was barely mentioned. I have heard similar dates since the 1960's and never let it get to me. I just made a note of it, checked if it might have some validity, just continued my relationship with the Lord, and went about my daily business. If it happens, I am ready. If it doesn't, then I still have a lot of work to do to keep me busy, both for the Lord and for my business. Same this time. I paid my quarterly estimated business taxes, paid my monthly payroll taxes, put in an order for parts and lubricants for my business equipment. Signed up for community outreach day our congregation is doing on October 15th. In other words, I didn't change my schedule or routine one bit. The 23rd came and went and I didn't get all upset and throw a fit. But I sure watched how many others who like to throw rocks seem to literally come out of their skin over such things, especially so after dates came and went. Maybe that speaks more about them than the folks making predictions. Maybe Bill Shakespeare was on the right track.....Ye Doest Protest Too Much, Me Thinks.

Yeah, it is pure speculation regarding a Jubilee year. Things got so messed up back then that I am not sure even the most ardent Rabbinical scholar can be certain. Is there really any difference? And what is the break point? Is it ok to talk about the Lord gathering His righteous, say, 100 years out, but if someone talks about the possibility a couple years or a couple months out then they are a nut job. What I find amazing is how many will claim that the removal of the righteous could happen at any time, but if someone mentions a time then they are some sort of false prophet. Why is it ok to mention "any" time, and not ok to mention this time or that? How does last Saturday, or this coming Saturday, or some day in January not fall into "any time"? All one has to do is follow the prescription given in scripture regarding someone who foretells something. Listen to them, check out what they are saying, and if what they are saying doesn't happen then ignore them from then on. Deuteronomy 18:22 (ISV) Whenever a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, and the oracle does not come about or the word is not fulfilled, then the Lord has not spoken it. The prophet will have spoken presumptuously, so you need not fear him.” All that seems to be going on is.... "I don't know what time it will happen, but I also know no one else has a clue". I would be willing to bet that same idea was tossed around 30AD when Yeshua was running around. Yet, He unequivocally held those folks accountable for knowing the time. I can almost hear as it might have been said back then.... "I know the Messiah will come to Israel, but there is no way it is at this time and there is no way anyone else can know". Luke 19:43-44 (NKJV) For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side, 44 and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” This next passage almost sounds like it was posted in this present time. The same mindset...... John 7:47-52 (NKJV) Then the Pharisees answered them, “Are you also deceived? 48 Have any of the rulers or the Pharisees believed in Him? 49 But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed.” 50 Nicodemus (he who came to Jesus by night, being one of them) said to them, 51 “Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” 52 They answered and said to him, “Are you also from Galilee? Search and look, for no prophet has arisen out of Galilee.”

I was thinking more of 2 Timothy 4:8

There is a crown of righteousness for those that are eagerly anticipating the Lord's gathering of them to Him. There is also some very choice words for those that scoff and rebuke. Either way, this is the season of Teshuvah (return and repentance), and even if nothing major occurs clear up to Yom Kippur this Saturday September 30th, it is still a season where we should all turn from any unrighteousness in our lives and seek the Lord's cleansing of us. A time to fully pitch our tent with the Lord and He pitch our tent with us. And it is only "folly" for those that seek to answer a matter before they have actually investigated it, per Proverbs. Any predictions regarding the removal should be a clarion call to all of us, at the very least, to be certain of our relationship with the Lord. So even the wrong predictions should have positive results.

I am always hopeful of the removal of the righteous. And I do think it will be associated with one of the moedim of Leviticus 23, Yom Teruah. When, not sure. This is the season of Teshuvah. It goes from Elul 1 (30 days prior to Yom Teruah / Trumpets) to Yom Kippur, which is Sept 30th. It is the season of return/repentance. It should be a season where we all look at our relationship with the Lord and make a point of "pitching our tent" with Him and Him "pitching His tent" with us. Much of what the OP stated is factual, with the Jubilee year idea the only possible exception. We just don't know and can only infer from various dates that line up. And while the head of the year was done on Yom Kippur instead of Yom Teruah during a Jubilee year as established in tradition, Yom Teruah did not change. Yom Teruah still is on the 1st of the month. So claiming that on a Jubilee year that they coincide is problematic. Tradition was added to the Torah in coming up with that one. The Torah does not state a change for Yom Teruah that it falls on the same day as Yom Kippur during a Jubilee year. The trumpets associated with certain Moedim is... 1st trump = Shavuot/Pentacost. Last trump = Yom Teruah / Trumpets. Great Tump = Yom Kippur / Day of Atonement. But, like other times, I am hopeful. I desire to be with Yeshua. It will not change my faith a bit if this Yom Kippur is not the removal. There is still plenty of work to do here also. I have primarily focused on fasting and prayer during this season of Tehsuvah that all those in the the body turn from all unrighteousness and seek cleansing of themselves by the Lord and dwell (pitch their tent) with the Lord. It is a time to look at ourselves and our relationship with Him. And that is good "just in case" advice if this is the season of the removal of the righteous. Instead of wasting time on putting down folks who are watching these signs, why not put that much effort into seeking a better relationship with the Lord. If the watchers of these signs are correct, wasting time scoffing at them is not going to look too good if the removal does happen. The scripture has some very choice words for scoffers and there is a crown of righteousness for those that are eagerly anticipating His coming. If they are wrong, then it still was a clarion call for us to make sure we are "pitching our tents" with Yeshua. Always a good thing.

LOL! Ok, just for you! You talked me into it.

I have found (not my own original idea) that the concept of "pitching our tent" with the Lord and learning how He "pitches His tent with us" pretty well exhibits the proper relationship. We dwell with Him and will emulate Yeshua in word, thought, and deed both to others and to the Father. And that close dwelling, we will learn who He is. A much more effective idea than a "do this" or "don't do that" or "commandment adherence" approach which seems limited in scope. It expresses what a saving faith truly is about. And everything else fits right into place when we pitch our tent with YHWH, the Father, and He pitches His tent with us. A much simpler yet more effective way to view these things. And very few people in the churches actually "pitch their tent" with the Lord and allow Him to "pitch His tent" with them and learn what that all means. The religious leaders Yeshua confronted had the same problem. They were staunch about the observance of things, they were "religious", but they would not "pitch their tent" with the Lord or allow Him to "pitch His tent" with them. There was no relationship at the heart level. None sought to closely dwell with the Lord, what pitching one's tent implies. In Revelation 3:20 expresses a portion of this same "pitching tents" and dwelling idea by Yeshua Himself.

Always keep in perspective, those days mentioned in Leviticus 23 are also called Moedim "appointed days" and Miqrah "rehearsals". They were established to point to the appointed times of the Messiah, just like the rest of the Torah (Law) is pointing to the Messiah. 4 of those appointed times have been fulfilled. 3 remain.

I would agree that there has been considerable corruption of ideas, but one salient fact still remains..... Yeshua Himself stated that the entire Torah (Law) can be summed up in... 1) Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and 2) Love your neighbor as yourself. That may sound very simplistic, but even one of the most venerated sages of Jewish thought, Hillel, obviously not a Christian, when asked by a student to summarize the Torah while standing on one foot, stated the very same thing as Yeshua. All of the commandments hang on the two expressed by Yeshua. I dearly love the Torah, for the standards of God it reveals, the teaching it provides, and how it points to the Messiah. But I have enough trouble staying up with what Yeshua said regarding this to get all caught up in details, which puts one at risk of adhering to a works righteousness idea. The condition of the heart is paramount.

I have to give them credit in one regard... their zeal. Too bad it is based on false theology. It would be nice to see a similar zeal within the Christian community.

Then you should also have a problem with the KJV translation. The translators themselves relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate (Jerome in the 4th century). They even made notes to each of the translators in the group in Latin. Their reliance on the Latin is clearly evident in their note to the readers they made in the introduction portion of the original 1611 translation. Along with the Masoretic Text (Authorized Rabbinical text compiled roughly 7th - 10th Century AD). The Textus Receptus is simply a compilation of the generally accepted Greek texts done by Erasmus in the 1500's. There is no original texts used by the KJV translators but compilations done by others and referring to translations done by others, even Tyndale. The same translation principles used by many version translators today. The KJV has even had to be revised occasionally to address errors in the text. No one really uses the original 1611 version anymore. There is also some evidence that King James wanted to limit the Puritan influence on the texts with the KJV translation. For instance, the original Geneva Bible translated apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 as "the departure" (as did many other pre-KJV English translations) whereas the KJV uses "falling away". Similar in some regards but dynamically different in other regards. The Geneva version would lend credence to a pre-trib removal of the righteous whereas the KJV subdues that idea with it's "falling away" translation. The KJV and Geneva are very reliable English translations, but they are not perfect. No translation is. There are just too many nuances in any original language that do not lend themselves to easy translation into another language. For instance, we in English understand the idea "it is raining cats and dogs" as being a major downpour of rain. That does not translate well literally into other languages that expresses the same idea we ascribe to it in the English. One must confer on what others have translated similar phrases into the receptor language. What I find truly amazing is that some KJV adherents will diss the New KJV as being one of these "damnable" new versions, but it uses the same texts that the KJV folks used and follows the same poetic style of the KJV. Just the language has been updated. I personally rely on several English translations for comparison and make some effort to dig into the Hebrew and Greek backgrounds of words in problematic passages. We each can only rely on the HS to guide us. If one wants to truly understand the original, then go take Hebrew and Greek studies and only use the original languages. Problem solved. Well, in part. There are even debates by those well versed in the original languages about how a word or idea is used.

I understand. No problem. This isn't like some issue that is conditional on salvation. The end goal is the same, we just disagree on the events and the timing. And I am fond of saying.... we all probably have some or most of the actual events wrong and probably will end up with egg on our face. God Bless you and yours! And thanks to you as well.

I don't think so. The Church is the Body of Messiah (1 Cor 12:27). The Church is to reign with a rod of iron along with Yeshua (Rev 2:26-27). So Rev 12 does represent Yeshua.... His Body the church. The church was conceived by the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem on Shavuot (Pentacost). Jerusalem (representing all Israel) is the Wife of God (Ezekiel 16). The church has experienced growth and development all this time. It is now ready to be born. And in several places of the OT, God shows how at the beginning of the labor pains, Israel gives birth to the male child which is a nation as Peter told us in chapter 2 of his first letter. And that those labor pains are associated in the OT with the Time of Jacob's (Israel) Trouble, or what many would commonly refer to as the 70th week of Daniel or the Great Tribulation. Those two witnesses are also called Olive Trees in Rev 11. And here: Zechariah 4:11-14 (NKJV Strong's,) 11 Then I answered and said to him, “What are these two olive trees—at the right of the lampstand and at its left?” 12 And I further answered and said to him, “What are these two olive branches that drip into the receptacles of the two gold pipes from which the golden oil drains?” 13 Then he answered me and said, “Do you not know what these are?” And I said, “No, my lord.” 14 So he said, “These are the two anointed ones, who stand beside the Lord of the whole earth.” Not in any way associated with the Church in that passage, yet clearly associated with the two witnesses of Rev 11. These Olive Trees stand at the temple in Jerusalem in both Zechariah and Revelation.

Probably because the Lord is intending for everyone on earth to see these two witnesses resurrected and ascend into Heaven as further testimony. Remember, the whole world (probably via the major news networks) is viewing these two guys dead on the street and celebrating them being bumped off. But then they are resurrected right before their eyes and ascend to heaven, much to their surprise. A lot more dramatic than just having these guys simply disappear or get snatched away. Don't you get that from the natural reading of Revelation 11 regarding them? Harpazo is not the word used of their ascension, compared to the child being caught up in Revelation 12. Nor is Harpazo the word used when John is told to "come up here". The Greek word anabaino is used which is more closely associated with rising, ascending, or being borne up. Harpazo is a forcible snatching away, as if someone is grabbed and yanked away. Totally different meaning. If you were standing on the street and were within feet of getting run over by a semi truck, you would probably prefer I were to harpazo you than anabaino you, or just lift you up. I'll let you decide on that one. Likewise, if all hell is about to break out on the earth, I would prefer the Lord harpazo me out of here, and quick! Which is what He says He will do (1 Thessalonians 4:17). Praise be to Him! Don't you think that the witnesses being called lamp stands is appropriate? These guys are the testimony of God, to the people on the earth. Isn't that what the church is supposed to be here and now? Yeshua said we are to be His witnesses (individually), right? (Acts 1:8) Same Greek word used for witnesses in that passage and in Revelation 11:3. At least that is what I get from Yeshua regarding each of us being salt and light (Matthew 5:15) where lamp stand is also used. The same Greek word lychnia (lamp stand) is used which is from the root word lychnos, a lamp, guide, witness, testimony.

You are correct, no book in the Bible requires external help to understand the rudimentary concepts the book is making. But even many times even the authors of NT books will use quotations and allusions to OT passages. Can you think of one NT book that doesn't? The Bible is an integrated message system written by over 40 authors over thousands of years that is delivered in a hostile environment and subject to hostile jamming. Pages can be ripped out of the Bible, yet the message remains. Line upon line, precept upon precept. Here a little, there a little. It is not divided into doctrinal sections. It is a holographic image, where parts of the bible can be removed, yet the picture remains, just like a hologram, but the resolution is lower when books or sections are removed. By utilizing the OT in supporting the NT and vice versa, resolution and clarity is added. Why rely on only a black and white image looking at one book, when one can have full 3D hi def resolution by applying all relevant scripture? And it is only looking at the lower resolution image that leads to the wildly different doctrinal positions, including eschatology, we see around us today. Small discrepancies in what we see can be expected among us, but some differences are so pronounced that they can only come from a lack of applying all the scripture.

Well, like many prophecies, Revelation 12 could have a dual application. The woman being Mary and the child Yeshua in a singular sense. And in a corporate sense, Israel and the Body of Messiah, the Church. Similar to the abomination of desolation prophecy. Antiochus was one application, or foreshadowing of it, and the future false messiah is the full application as mentioned by Yeshua. To be fair in all of this, for many years I viewed Revelation 12 as a picture of Messiah's first coming. Mostly because of what others said. When I started really getting into it and looking back at OT references to "labor", "birth pains", etc as they pertained to Israel and the period called "time of Jacob's trouble" and "Tribulation", then my view changed completely to what it is now. That it is Israel giving birth to the Church which was conceived at Shavuot (Pentacost) in Jerusalem by the HS, just as the HS conceived Yeshua in Mary. And combined with the other OT texts the unequivocally state that the dead are raised and are hidden along with the living righteous during this time period just solidified that position. On top of that, while the Church is called the "bride of Christ" in some passages, likewise Israel is called the wife of God in the OT. I also think it is valid to use the OT as supporting evidence when reading Revelation, or any other NT book. The Mosaic Law states that an issue can only be confirmed on the testimony of at least two witnesses. I see those witnesses as the OT and the NT. The Bereans were commended by Paul for searching the scripture daily to see if what he taught them was true. All they had was the OT at that time. So it would seem that the OT should be held on equal footing with the NT when it comes to these things. It is all one Bible given to us by the same God. Allow me to also state, ghtan, that I applaud your reasoned dialogue about this. We may not see eye to eye on everything, but we can discuss it like adults and share our ideas about it. That is the way all doctrinal discussions should occur. I hope many others are taking notice. It is so disconcerting to see food fights over these kinds of issues.

I see Revelation 12 as the removal of the righteous more than Revelation 4. While I do see Revelation 4 as the church is at the throne of God, there is nothing there that describes a removal like 12 does. Only implied. I understand how many have viewed John being brought up to the throne of God as "symbolic" of the church being removed, that was always a little rough for me to see. It was just John. But Revelation 12, now that is far more apropos in light of the rest of scripture. The main aspect in Revelation 4 that confirms for me that it is the church in view, is that the 24 elders all have crowns. That would seem to imply the various rewards have been given to the church at that time. And given the events going on at the throne from Revelation 4 on, it would seem that Satan and his flunkies are out of there, having been cast out. Probably at almost the same time as the church has been removed from here. I do see the 144K as Jews. Kinda hard not to when 12K of each of the 12 tribes is detailed like it is. I believe that when God takes the time to describe things in that much detail, He generally means what He says and says what He means. And after all, the present church is out of there in my opinion, the main purpose of the GT is getting Israel to finally acknowledge their Messiah (Hosea 5:15 and Matthew 23:39), and the two witnesses are most likely Jewish also. Some have speculated they are Moses and Elijah, but I really don't focus that deep on who they actually are. There are some aspects where one could easily see a Mid trib view of things. That is why I generally have not taken mean pot shots at people who see things that way. As I am noted for saying, in the final analysis, we probably all have some if not most of this wrong and will end up with egg on our face. We see things thru mortal eyes stuck in this 4 dimensions we live in. Later, we will see things much more clearly and know for certain what God meant. All we can do now is discuss the various aspects among ourselves of what might be occurring in the future and try to get some sort of a handle on it. After all, the end goal is the same. Just how and when we get there is in dispute.

You are implying something that wasn't stated in my post. I never stated that John in chapter 4 represents the church. I simply stated that John was taken to the throne of God similar to where the child of Revelation 12 is taken. I never said it was a harpazo event for John. John clearly says that he was in the spirit in V2. There is nothing to imply that the child of Rev 12 is in the spirit, but that it is a physical catching up. But they are both taken to the throne of God. That was the only similarity I mentioned. Looking back, I probably should have stated it better. But it still remains.... Yeshua Himself was not "harpazo" at either His birth or His ascension, yet this child is "harpazo" to the throne of God. Thus it can only mean the body of Messiah, the Church. And that is where John was taken in the spirit to describe what is going on there. Paul makes it very clear that we will be "harpazo" out of here. 1 Thessalonians 4:17. It is also the OT passages that show Israel (the woman who is also called the wife of God in the OT) is delivering at the start of the labor pains, as opposed to going thru a entire period of labor and then delivering. And the passages also state unequivocally that Israel's labor pains are the period known as Jacob's Trouble, or what we call the Great Tribulation period. That is the part that seems to elude those that hold Revelation 12 is a mid trib event. They fail to take into account the OT passages that also talk about the same event. And every passage in the OT that discusses this event talks about Israel giving birth at the beginning of the labor pains. Not half way or at the end of the labor pains, but at the start. And that Israel is giving birth to her children as a nation. And Peter is unequivocal in his first letter that the church is a holy nation. 1 Peter 2:9 Chapters 11-15 are simply parenthetical chapters from a differing perspective of the events of chapters 4-10. What also leads to some seeing this as a mid trib event is that they fail to see that 11-15 are like a powerpoint presentation where overlays are put on top of the other previous chapters to enhance the picture of what is transpiring. Compare Revelation 4:10-11 with Revelation 15:3-4 for instance. And many other comparison can be made.