Identifying John as one of the two witnesses

[Diaste]

On 7/30/2019 at 8:53 AM, dhchristian said:

Diaste here is what I wrote Sister in its full context.

Welcome to the discussion Sister,

"Re-read John 21:23 with the mindset that John is one of the two witnesses, and you can see this as a proof for him being one of the two witnesses, even with the "if" in there. Meaning if it is the will of God to do so, he can. We cannot limit God to accomplish the supernatural because of constraints put on us living in the natural world. When God asked Ezekiel can these dry bones live, He did not say yes or no, he said "Lord thou knowest". This answer is the only right answer in this case, and is the point of this whole post.

What is impossible with man is possible with God."

Do you think that God is incapable of doing this? Then you are guilty of Limiting God, and putting him in the box of your understanding. If you are honest with yourself, you will see that your defensive response here to comment I did not make to you is a result of conviction, Some people resist conviction, to their detriment, others learn form it. Saying "Lord thou Knowest" is the ultimate example of humility. The last line being what Jesus himself said...

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. (Matt. 19:26)

Before you come back with another snooty remark such as this, why not examine yourself first. Conviction does not come from me, but from the Holy Ghost.

The remark was an honest question. In essence it questions the philosophy of a preconception when approaching a text. If we are going to coach a particular mind set before parsing where's the limit? The danger is in allowing this in one's own study and then suggesting it to others. It will not stop at the mere suggestion of doing this once for a singular purpose or just for a moment, it will become an individual quest to turn the text into a reflection of a person's world view, experience, rearing, hopes and desires, and truth is no longer found. This is something we see daily, especially when the subject is eschatology.

I'm not saying it couldn't be John. Or Moses. Or any other pair God so chooses. The partner of Elijah, at least the history leads us to the idea that Elijah will come both in spirit and physical form, is not identified so it's impossible to know for fact that's any particular person. 

As I said before, I say Enoch as he did not die a physical death and it's a similarity he shares with Elijah. This is a scriptural material fact, not something I made up. I feel this sort of reliance on the word of God is the highest form of humility as it's also a material fact, e.g.,

" Trust in the LORD with all  thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." - Proverbs 6

Since it's an open forum I don't think there is a restriction on commentary or replies as long as one complies with TOS. If you don't like me making comments feel free to block me or report me.

Edited August 1, 2019 by Diaste

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

The remark was an honest question. In essence it questions the philosophy of a preconception when approaching a text. If we are going to coach a particular mind set before parsing where's the limit? The danger is in allowing this in one's own study and then suggesting it to others. It will not stop at the mere suggestion of doing this once for a singular purpose or just for a moment, it will become an individual quest to turn the text into a reflection of a person's world view, experience, rearing, hopes and desires, and truth is no longer found. This is something we see daily, especially when the subject is eschatology.

I'm not saying it couldn't be John. Or Moses. Or any other pair God so chooses. The partner of Elijah, at least the history leads us to the idea that Elijah will come both in spirit and physical form, is not identified so it's impossible to know for fact that's any particular person. 

As I said before, I say Enoch as he did not die a physical death and it's a similarity he shares with Elijah. This is a scriptural material fact, not something I made up. I feel this sort of reliance on the word of God is the highest form of humility as it's also a material fact, e.g.,

" Trust in the LORD with all  thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." - Proverbs 6

Since it's an open forum I don't think there is a restriction on commentary or replies as long as one complies with TOS. If you don't like me making comments feel free to block me or report me.

Diaste,

Mindset is everything when approaching prophecy. The Limit is the Word of God, which is far bigger than our understanding. A person's worldview is the problem, and until we can approach the Word of God with what I call Pauline ignorance (As opposed to Socratic ignorance) then we are bound to bring in our own preconceptions. WE all are guilty of this to an extent. What is Pauline Ignorance? For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. (1 Cor. 2:2)

It is from this point of weakness that we can begin to be taught what is the grandeur of the Word of God, and the Gospel. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. (1 Cor. 2:5)

Look at the responses on this post, and the multiplicity of ideas as to who the two witnesses are. Some say It has to be Elijah and Enoch for it is appointed unto men once to die.... But what about people like Lazaraus and Eutychus, who were both dead, and resurrected and then died again. When we use the Word of God to Limit God to our understanding we are limiting God to act in the natural realm supernaturally. This is known as Desism. Moses appeared on the mount of transfiguration yet he had clearly died once, while Elijah had not, and appeared. So What is impossible with men is possible with God.

There is a lesson to be learned here. We can learn from each other, and this is the fellowship of the saints, Or we can Take your advice at the first sign that someone disagrees with us and block them or report them or what not. The fellowship of the saints is not always a pleasant thing, and neither should it be, Paul rebuked Peter in Galatians in front of everyone, Yet Peter later wrote and affirmed that Paul's writings were scripture. James corrected Paul, and told him to carry out his Nazerite vows in the Temple, for many Jewish believers were saying he had turned and rejected the Law. He went on to write many of his epistles while imprisoned in Rome. What would have happened had Paul "blocked" James, Or what would have happened had Peter been so offended that he reported Paul to the authorities? We would not have the Word of God as we do today. Iron sharpens iron, and the Word of God is the Sword of the Spirit, and cuts to the marrow. The fellowship of saints is similar in that we sharpen each other, we may not agree, but in the process we sanctify each other by rebuke, correction, and exhortation, along with edifying one another as we interact.  

God Bless

=================================

I Have a very Busy next couple of days, and will not be able to comment here much. So to any who I have not replied I will get back to you.   

[Marilyn C]

14 hours ago, douggg said:

Hi Marilyn, are you sure you don't mean that God's word "indicates" it (not tells us) ?  

I happen to agree with your conclusion, that imo, the two witnesses are likely Elijah and Moses.    But God's word does not "tell" us, as Mose and Elijah is not directly named the two witnesses in Revelation 11.      God did not speak and say the two witnesses are Moses and Elijah.    We are drawing a conclusion because of our rationale.

Hi dougg,

I am sure that God tells us their names - Moses & Elijah.

Here is an example of my thinking - Say we are on holidays and we say we met 2 friends, Jack & Jill. We then say THEY had lunch with us, THEY went to the beach with us. Because we had first mentioned Jack & Jill`s names we don`t have to mention them again as the reader knows who THEY are because we told them their names.

Thus when the Holy Spirit tells us who the 2 men are with Jesus, Moses and Elijah, then when those men are mentioned again & again, we KNOW who they are - Moses & Elijah. We see that these 2 men witnessed special events concerning the Lord; they had talked with Jesus of His upcoming departure, (death) they were at the empty tomb, (His resurrection), & they witnessed Jesus` ascension. 

Finally we read about the 2 witnesses in Revelation preaching to the people of Israel, (& the world) of the Lord, who He was/is and His soon coming kingdom rule. We don`t have to guess who THEY are as the Holy Spirit has already named them - Moses & Elijah.

Marilyn.

[Sister]

On 7/30/2019 at 8:20 PM, dhchristian said:

Welcome to the discussion Sister,

Re-read John 21:23 with the mindset that John is one of the two witnesses, and you can see this as a proof for him being one of the two witnesses, even with the "if" in there. Meaning if it is the will of God to do so, he can. We cannot limit God to accomplish the supernatural because of constraints put on us living in the natural world. When God asked Ezekiel can these dry bones live, He did not say yes or no, he said "Lord thou knowest". This answer is the only right answer in this case, and is the point of this whole post.

What is impossible with man is possible with God. 

Hello dhchristian

Jesus was about to die.  He was coming back from the grave.  When he died they all mourned as if they were not going to see him again....because of lack of understanding.  They "all" tarried until he returned, not just John.  Christ returned in 3 days after his death.

The only one who didn't tarry was Judas for he went to the grave.  The rest all stayed faithful and stayed put in Jerusalem.  They didn't scatter.

 John 17:12   While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

[dhchristian]

Just now, Sister said:

Hello dhchristian

Jesus was about to die.  He was coming back from the grave.  When he died they all mourned as if they were not going to see him again....because of lack of understanding.  They "all" tarried until he returned, not just John.  Christ returned in 3 days after his death.

The only one who didn't tarry was Judas for he went to the grave.  The rest all stayed faithful and stayed put in Jerusalem.  They didn't scatter.

 John 17:12   While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

The Problem with this is that Jesus spoke these words after he was resurrected.... Meaning this tarry could refer to the second coming... Although I agree it is not a set stone comment. 

If there is any one of the apostles that is most qualified to be a witness, it is John. 

[Sister]

20 minutes ago, dhchristian said:

The Problem with this is that Jesus spoke these words after he was resurrected.... Meaning this tarry could refer to the second coming... Although I agree it is not a set stone comment. 

If there is any one of the apostles that is most qualified to be a witness, it is John. 

I am not so sure these exact words were after his resurrection because why would Peter then ask who was going to betray him?  This is going back to the last supper.

John 21:20   Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

John 21:21   Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?

John 21:22   Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
 

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, Oseas Ramos de Siqueira said:

Revelation 11:3-4

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses ... 4 these are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Candlestick is the symbol of the Churches (Rev.1:v.20).  

Two candlesticks --> two Churches -  The true Gentile Church and the true Jewish Church of our Lord JESUS Christ. - two witnesses -  JESUS says through Revelation: I will give power unto my two witnesses. 

Zechariah  4:v.11-12   
11 - What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 ... What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves? (or discharging gold through the two gold pipes?) 

Two Olive Trees or Two gold Pipes:

Both mean the same. Both mean the Word of God, that are the Old Testament and the New Testament. From these two gold pipes discharge gold through the two olive trees - two witnesses - two candlesticks - two Churches -, the two anointed ones who have been anointed with oil; they are standing with the Lord of all the land (all Israel) and of the whole earth.

Hi Oseas,

If you look at bit more carefully at the context of the 2 witnesses you will see that it describes 2 people.  (Rev. 11: 3 - 12)

- clothed in sackcloth,

- fire proceeds from their mouth,

- their dead bodies will lie in the street,

- they stood on their feet,

- they ascended into heaven.

Marilyn.

[R. Hartono]

17 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Oseas,

If you look at bit more carefully at the context of the 2 witnesses you will see that it describes 2 people.  (Rev. 11: 3 - 12)

- clothed in sackcloth,

- fire proceeds from their mouth,

- their dead bodies will lie in the street,

- they stood on their feet,

- they ascended into heaven.

Marilyn.

Right Marilyn churches do not burn people with fire.

[douggg]

3 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

I am sure that God tells us their names - Moses & Elijah.

All I am saying is when you refer to God's word, it is taken that you are referring to the printed text which everyone is reading.    I am suggesting that you repackage your words from "tells" to something else like "indicates" when, for example,  it does not directly name the two witnesses in the printed text - which it does not.

When someone says God's word "tells" something, it is the same as saying God says.    Which to claim God said something, which He did not say, is being a false prophet or false teacher.     We need to separate what we conclude or reason or interprete - from what God Himself has actually stated in the text.

Usually it is best to stay away from using these two words in conjunction with each other "God tells".... because those are usually followed up by our own interpretations.    

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dave Robbins and Irving Baxter on their end time ministries videos are always using that terminology or similar to saying God's word tells us.... and then proceed to their interpretation... falsely presenting it as if God Himself spoke their words as being His Words.

For example, they would say God's word tells us World War III will take place soon.     Well, that's not in the text of God Himself saying World War III.     They are creating a false impression, trying to add credence to their interpretation or understanding.   

Edited August 2, 2019 by douggg

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, Sister said:

John 21:20   Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

This is john's way of identifying himself as the author of the Gospel. Here is the incident from the past that this is referring back to in the Gospel.

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. (John 13:23-24)

John used this means to identify himself in the Gospel he wrote 4 times. (John 20:2, 21:7, 21:20), It is believed that he did this so as not to be confused with John the Baptist. The incident In John 21 is clearly after the resurrection.

John 20:1 is when the resurrection occurs. This obscure way John identifies himself in the Gospel also has a parallel in the way he identifies himself as the one who measures the temple as well, although he does identify himself as John at the beginning and end of Revelation. Was this his way of sealing up while revealing what he was shown?

And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not. (John 10:4)

And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. (Rev. 22:10)