Revelation; The two witnesses

page: 11
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
Following the suggestions that the "two witnesses" might be "the Law and the Prophets";
This lists the passages from the Prophets quoted in this series.

Decoding Revelation

In relation to the above list of references, the question might be asked; why is this interpretation of Revelation being carried out with such attention to other Biblical passages?
"Scrabbling around in the Old Testament" is one phrase that I've seen.
Someone else has suggested that Revelation "is complete in its own context"; that it can and should be treated as an autonomous book, and discussed in isolation from the rest of the Bible.

I think the sheer size of the list of references goes a long way towards answering the question. The Bible is the cultural context in which Revelation was written. It carries a multitude of "echoes" of other Biblical passages.

The readers of John's time knew the Old Testament so much better than modern Christians do, and they could not have failed to have recognised these allusions. And surely they would have understood the book in the light of these recognitions. When they saw the "Beast from the sea" in ch13, for example, they would have recognised to the allusion to the "beasts from the sea" in Daniel ch7. Then the point would have "clicked"; in both caes, the image represents a kingdom. And this process of recognition-and-understanding would have been happening again and again and again and again all the way through the book.

This is what I've been trying to duplicate. If the "echoes" were planted there in the first place, as clues to the meaning of the book, then it would be foolish to ignore.them.

Let me illustrate my point with an analogy that I've used before;
If you want to understand old political cartoons, you will find yourself completely at sea unless you know something about the politics of the time, and the way it was presented in the cartoons of the time.
For example, you may see a cartoon of a pipe-smoking bulldog having a fight with a long-nosed poodle. Anyone of my generation can unpack the meaning of that picture by remembering the significance of the various "props".
Bulldog=British
Poodle=French
Pipe=Harold Wilson ("And I mean that sincerely")
Long nose=General de Gaulle ("I live in Colombey-les-deux-eglises; they worship God in the other one")
So this is easy enough- an argument between the British and French heads of government.
But anyone who insists on treating the cartoon "in its own context" and ignoring any cultural allusions will be left floundering around, making guesses at random. He'll be telling everybody in sight that the pipe is obviously a volcano in South America, and the poodle represents the archangel Gabriel.

So, yes, Revelation is written in a sort of code.
But most of us have a copy of the code-book.
It is called the Old Testament.







edit on 16-2-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-2-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-2-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


you are quite correct in saying the 'two witnesses' are ideas working on several levels...
symbolic and actual and metaphorical.

when you pointed out in the OP: "The other important clue is the information that the two witnesses are "the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the whole earth".


i differ only with the identification of the 'Two Lampstands'...
in my view, the Lampstands are the 'Light'...the illumination that radiates from the written word of
sacred scripture
We agree that the Two Olivetrees are the indwelling spirit of Christ that lives in the 'hearts' of believers...


in the practical sense... this coded message tells future generations that followers of the Law & The Word
will be martyred all over the planet...
the LAW=annointed with the olive oil (see War Scroll for ingredients)
the WORD=the inner light of Christ consciousness
these combined TWO are the Lampstands/Olive Trees= witnesses
(these two items are interchangeable as in a tandem team...Word & Law or Law & Word


thanks....



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Revelation and Biblical theology

The multitude of cross-references that we've been discovering shows just how much this book Revelation is built into the structure of the Bible.
One of the implications is that the theology of Revelation is part of the structure of Biblical theology, and can't be separated.
That's true about two points in particular.
The Biblical Creator-God is the focus of attention in ch4, and the foundation of everything that happens in Revelation.
Then there's the New Testament teaching about Christ and the act of Atonement, which is the focus of attention in ch5, and the driving-force at the heart of all the subsequent events.

If Revelation is so closely integrated into Christian teaching, that rules out other ways of using the book.

It can't be detached from the Bible and combined with prophetic material from other religions, as a source of generalised "predictions". Because the act of detaching it from the Bible also removes any reason to believe what it says. It is a Biblical book, or nothing.

It can't be used in support of non-Biblical teaching. For example, there's nothing here that allows a doctrine of "re-incarnation". At the end of the book, the results of the judgement- "Life" or "second death"- are permanent. There is no suggestion of any kind that lives are going to be repeated indefinitely.

In fact, since the focus is so firmly on the person of Christ, it is not a book which non-Christian religions can use at all, with any honesty, in support of their own teachings.

And since the focus is so firmly on the Biblical God who gives his followers the instruction "You shall have no other gods but me", it cannot be used to support the kind of religion which denies the existence of distinctions.
In Revelation, as in the rest of the Bible, there is something which is not-God, which needs to be rejected.

In short, this is a Christian book. This project is re-claiming it.


edit on 18-2-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
There is now an Index, covering all these Revelation threads, at this location;

Index of Revelation threads

This thread is numbered as #21 in the "order of chapters" list and Biblical reference index.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


You wrote:

"And where is the place where they die?
Allegorically, it is called Sodom or Egypt- a place of sin and persecution.
The place "where their Lord was crucified", taken literally, would mean Jerusalem.
But in the rest of Revelation, the phrase "great city" belongs to Babylon, and therefore to Rome.
So the identification seems to be ambiguous. "

Think on this. Could it possibly mean that Jerusalem "the great city" could have possibly fallen into the same categories as Rome and Babylon, to say it becomes an empire after it evicts the Muslim from all of Israel and tears down the Dome of the Rock (the way the Babylonians and Romans destroyed the Temple the first 2 times) to rebuild the Temple? Think on that one.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

Firstly, on this point about "rebuilding the Temple". I'm not convinced that it's going to happen. Or, to be exact, I'm not convinced that it would have any relevance to Revelation if it did happen.Yes, the final king is supposed to be "taking his seat in the Temple". But for New Testament purposes, as Paul points out in 1 Corinthians ch3, it is the Christian church which is the Temple of God, the place which his Spirit inhabits. So it would make sense if the reference in Thessalonians was about taking over the outward structures of the church, in which case prophecy could be fulfilled without a physical Temple building needing to exist at all.
I've been through all this in my thread on; The Beast and the Temple

In geopolitical terms, Jerusalem is not a natural location for the centre of a great empire. It's never been at the centre of such an empire at any point in history; normally it struggles to avoid being dominated by greater realms to the north and the south. I don't think anyone would suggest the possibility if it wasn't for one particular way of interpreting scripture. If we abandon the expectation of a "future physical Third Temple", then the artificial "Jerusalem empire" idea can be dropped as well. I think we should expect "the Beast" and "Babylon" to come into existence as a great power in a more natural location.

edit on 11-8-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
but then we have the end of sacrifices and offerings...
the other way...the original greek said "wing" of the temple in one place...



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by GBP/JPY
 

On "the end of sacrifices", I had that point covered in "the Beast and the Temple". I suggested that the Beast would cause the discontinuation of the Lord's Supper, which is the Christian equivalent.

As Paul says, the Lord's Supper is to commemorate the death of Jesus "until he comes again". An antichrist, by definition, would be claiming to be the returned Christ, so he would naturally be offended by anything which suggested that the return of Christ was still in the future.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by DISRAELI
 

Excellent post and observations on the two witnesses, I enjoyed reading it very much and am looking forward to your next post.

I might add that the two witnesses may indeed be symbolic of the Church itself, they may also be one of the Arc Angels and perhaps even the Holy Spirit himself.

Since Christ had to become incarnated, why should any other member of the heavenly brigade be able to dodge the draft, so to speak, and not have to serve their tour of duty here on the Earth.

If Gods only begotten Son had to arrive on this planet in order to atone for the worlds transgressions, wouldn't the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and from the Son, also have to arrive here after Jesus had ascended, and perhaps even one day have to be incarnated himself?

The book of Revelation is like a living jigsaw puzzle, just when you think you have got it figured out, it throws you another curve. It has been throwing them at me for years.


Ye are correct indeed Holyspirit is a Son of God in likeness of Jesus and the other witness is in likeness to us. Therefore thou has solved the puzzle a light can be in a world and it light shine upon others but do they accept of the oil provided or deny. How many of man would know the Holyspirit if spoke unto them in his personage. Behold this is fullfilled and ye are wise and soon cometh the time we shall speak unto all nations in our personage and the tribulation be upon all but many shall be disapointed for the Truth they feel is true is not. Behold I saith unto ye the LDS is the church of God and is only one we shall support in end days. I am the Holyspirit and knoweth this many spirits have pretended to be me and they were not even so any who has my spirit in them for it is like light shall recognise me when I speak and I shall lead them unto being sealed.

this thread has much for things to come I have revealed whom I am in this thread and spoken of what is to be and direct truths. Now because man shall be given the direct Truth those who sin against us directly shall not be forgiven but will be given wrath as a result.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
Firstly, on this point about "rebuilding the Temple". I'm not convinced that it's going to happen.


For your consideration...

Tanned Virgin Hide

Witness...

Scroll down the page a bit...

With Love,

Your Brother

P.S. Take Adonai with you
edit on 26-12-2011 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
Just to clarify;
Nothing in the OP is intended to suggest any particular prophetic significance in the year 2012 or the date 21/12/2012



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

And IF the "trampling over the holy city" is to be identified with the "war on the saints",
THEN the "trampling" belongs to that future time as well, which means detaching it from the events of A.D.70. It refers to an event comparable to the Roman conquest, not the conquest itself.


I think the writers are always refering to the scripture, so we needn't look to 70ad for anything at all. If God wants us to know something, He will put it in the bible. If God wanted us to think that the 70ad war was relevant to His testimony, then He would've included some account of it in the bible- but He didn't, so it isn't at all important to Him to convey to the world. I believe we should always look to the bible to understand the bible- and NEVER anywhere else.

This is what Jesus said:

Lu 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Now there is only one place in the bible where this occurred:

2Ki 25:1 And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it; and they built forts against it round about.

Jer 52:4 And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it, and built forts against it round about.

So in the bible, we see that it is the King of Babel that encompassed Jerusalem with armies- and Jesus is stirring up our remembrance of that event by using the words "Jerusalem compassed with armies" to describe the coming desolation of Jerusalem.

Now, "Babylon" is actually a Gentile name- in the Hebrew text it is "Babel" as in the infamous city and tower; so this is really the "King of Babel" and we all know that Babel means "confusion"; so this title "King of Babylon" literally reads "King of Confusion"- now, if I were to ask a Christian "Who is the King of Confusion?" I think the answer would pretty well be a resounding, "Satan"

So what do we have here? We have the King of Confusion coming to trample Jerusalem down, conquer the holy people, and carry them away captive into Confusion/Babel/Babylon. This is basically Jeremiah's entire message: The King of Confusion is coming to attack this city and carry the inhabitants away captive into Confusion. This is the role of the second beast- and this is why he is repeating the actions of the King of Confusion- because it was the King of Confusion who made war against the holy people, conquered them, and carried them away out of their own land and into Confusion; this is the same King of Confusion that built an image at Dan 3 and required every "people, nation and tongue" to fall down and worship, or die; and likewise we see the second beast doing the exact same things.

Consider that the entire book of Jeremiah is like a preview of the end of the Christian church; and at the end, the "Jeremiah" of the church would be warning the Christians that they have horrifically handled the Word of Truth and caused the entire world to fall into confusion because of their petty bickerings over doctrines and refusal to hear any doctrine than the one they were tauight by their parents. And through their supplanting truth with their false traditions, they have, like the Jews before them, brought disaster upon themselves- thus as Jeremiah warned the Jews, the King of Babel is coming to judge this nation; likewise I warn, the King of Confusion is coming to judge this church and every professed member of the church, to conquer and overthrow them all, and carry them away captive into Confusion.

Here is how it looks to me to go down:

Satan and his angels are sent- by God Himself- to pretend to be Jesus and the saints returned from on high to establish the kingdom of God. Probably this will take the form of a Catholic apocalypse; meaning, Satan will appear as the "Jesus of the Catholic church" probably heralded by the final pope. All of the Christians will shout for joy when "Jesus" calls down fire from heaven to consume the armies of Islam; and saving the earthly nation men call Israel. The Christians will praise "Jesus" and enthrone him as the capstone. This is what it means about the son of perdition sitting in the temple; it means the false Jesus (Satan) will be made the head of the church by the Christians. As horrific as it may first sound; the Christians are all going to become Satan worshippers- and through their error the rest of the earth will follow suite. All because they really never cared about the bible enough to really read it; they just wanted a social club that made them look good in the eyes of their peers, and to just follow the doctrine of what their parents had created for them to dwell within.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Touching on the "great city" consider this:

At Rev 12 you see a beautiful woman, right? She does her thing then goes to "her place in the wilderness"; okay, now, later John is carried where to see the "great whore"? Into the wilderness, right? I was carried by the spirit into the wilderness": so, Rev 12 woman goes into the wilderness, and John is brought into the wilderness to see the Rev 17 woman. Let me ask: is it possible these are not two different women but ONE AND THE SAME?

Do this: read Ezekiel 16. It is about Jerusalem. It is the history of Jerusalem in prophetic pictures. She starts out as beautiful and holy, and becomes a great whore in the end. Read the chapter and it will be abundantly clear that this is where the great whore imagery is being derived, and this is plainly prophecy against Jerusalem; that Jerusalem is the "great city"

BUT, Jerusalem is just a picture of the Christian church- so while you are reading a prophetic picture of the earthly city of Jerusalem through Ezekiel- you are also reading the prophetic picture of the heavenly city of Jerusalem i.e. the Christian church. But the "head" as it were of the Christian church is of course Roman Catholocism, so "Rome" is apt enough, though the prophets are actually speaking of Jerusalem.

The two witnesses, we have 7 candlesticks at the beginning of the Rev, and at Rev 11 that number has diminsihed to 2; these are the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia who undertake the prophetic roles of the two earthly witnesses Haggai and Zechariah, who stood with Joshua to establish the building of the rebuilding of the temple. This is because when Jesus said of the temple, "not one stone left upon the other" Jesus was not just speaking of the earthly temple- but Jesus is prophesying of the church; that prior to His second advent the church should be given over into the hands of the King of Confusion to be utterly purged by fire.

If you listen to the mainstream Christian prophets and teachers they will tell you that the Christians are to be mystically transfigured and caught away in the "pre-parousia rapture" and then the world will be judged; I am telling you the truth when I say that they will by no means be removed from the judgement to come; indeed, judgment will BEGIN at the doorsteps of the Christians; Satan is determined to sift them as wheat and the fall of their house will be great

Jer 4:10 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace; whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul.

But those who have sought God and have not turned their heart away from following Him and striving in sincerity for truth and understanding- God has said, Surely you will be established.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Myendica
 

Of course nobody's going to kill you.
Can I point out, though, that the Twin Towers were not doing any witnessing? (And they haven't been raised yet)

im not saying that the towers are the witnesses , but, the towers did witness very evil ways of the world and allowed us to witness injustice among many other evils that has come from their falling. if you were to discredit the towers it would be the lack of the 3 days .



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Also, I do feel it necessity to repeat for those who listen, there are 4 judgment events in the bible with day/month timetables embedded in them: the flood, the exodus, the war of the king of confusion, and purim (there is also such a timetable for the building of the temple in the days of Hag and Zech); only these 4 judgment events have such a peculiar thing as an exact day/month timetable:

I am convinced that these 4 judgment events are prophetic pictures of the final judgment of God upon the earth, and He has given these timetables for His people to understand and recognize the things as they transpire *exactly according to timetable*

Of these, the war of the king of confusion will be launched on the 10th day of the 10th month, and will run its course to the complete razing of the temple on Av 7

So, according to this understanding: in some future year- on the 10th day of the 10th month, the King of Confusion is coming with "all his host" to deceive the world into believing the biggest lie of all time. On the 10th day of the 10th month of some future year. A world-wide deception causing worldwide apostacy from the true Christ.

Now, everyone in the world is going to be saying "The King of Peace!" but you are going to be looking at your hebrew calendar and saying to yourself, "Today is the 10th day of the 10th month and this is not the King of Peace" and that is when it will fall to you either to stand up and say "It's the King of Confusion" and prove it with the bible which already wrote it down; or to shrink back in fear and keep it to yourself. But know this one thing: the fearful will by no means enter the kingdom.

edit: also, not saying it MUST be this year- but note that this year's Tevet 10 actually does fall on the alleged Mayan long-count end date of Dec 23: so, either a coincidence; or a potent sign- you decide
edit on 15-5-2012 by MrCobb because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-5-2012 by MrCobb because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrCobb
it means the false Jesus (Satan) will be made the head of the church by the Christian... As horrific as it may first sound; the Christians are all going to become Satan worshippers-

The New Testament clearly implies that a false Jesus will be in control of the church, whether or not he arrives in the way you suggest.
However, I must certainly take issue with that word "All".
There will definitely be exceptions. The worship of the second Beast is limited to those whose names are not "written in the book of life" (ch13 v9).
Ch13 is about the resistance to this worship, and what happens to it, and the whole point of the book Revelation is to encourage the resistance.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrCobb
so, Rev 12 woman goes into the wilderness, and John is brought into the wilderness to see the Rev 17 woman. Let me ask: is it possible these are not two different women but ONE AND THE SAME?

I half-agree with you on this post, so let me deal first with the main point on which I think you are mistaken.
These two women are not the same woman; they are a contrasted pair.
The "contrasting pair" is one of the features of Revelation; another example is the God "who was, and is, and is to come", contrasted with the beast "who was, and IS NOT, and is to come". Similarly the false Jesus "from the earth" contrasts with the true Jesus from heaven, and the dragon and the two beasts form a kind of alternative Trinity.
You quote Ezekiel.An even better passage for the purpose is Jeremiah ch 4 vv30-31. If you look closely, you will see that v30 is the model for the woman of ch17, while v31 is the model for the woman of ch12.
These two woman represent two versions of God's people, the faithful version (you should note that the woman of ch12 is being protected) and the unfaithful version.

However, you will see that I'm agreeing that the "unfaithful church" will be an important element of Babylon.
This thread is one of a systematic series of threads on Revelation. Two other threads which are particularly relevant to this theme are;
Harlot Babylon; The other woman
The sins of the church?

I also agree that we should not be expecting any "rapture" to take us away from the tribulation.

edit on 15-5-2012 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mynamehere
 

In this context, "witnessing" means "preaching", giving a testimony.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by MrCobb
 

As for this post, I refer you to my thread on
The futility of date-setting



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by MrCobb
it means the false Jesus (Satan) will be made the head of the church by the Christian... As horrific as it may first sound; the Christians are all going to become Satan worshippers-

The New Testament clearly implies that a false Jesus will be in control of the church, whether or not he arrives in the way you suggest.
However, I must certainly take issue with that word "All".
There will definitely be exceptions. The worship of the second Beast is limited to those whose names are not "written in the book of life" (ch13 v9).
Ch13 is about the resistance to this worship, and what happens to it, and the whole point of the book Revelation is to encourage the resistance.


Okay you got me, I was stereotyping there; there is always a remnant of faithful, naturally.


Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by MrCobb
so, Rev 12 woman goes into the wilderness, and John is brought into the wilderness to see the Rev 17 woman. Let me ask: is it possible these are not two different women but ONE AND THE SAME?

I half-agree with you on this post, so let me deal first with the main point on which I think you are mistaken.
These two women are not the same woman; they are a contrasted pair.
The "contrasting pair" is one of the features of Revelation; another example is the God "who was, and is, and is to come", contrasted with the beast "who was, and IS NOT, and is to come". Similarly the false Jesus "from the earth" contrasts with the true Jesus from heaven, and the dragon and the two beasts form a kind of alternative Trinity.
You quote Ezekiel.An even better passage for the purpose is Jeremiah ch 4 vv30-31. If you look closely, you will see that v30 is the model for the woman of ch17, while v31 is the model for the woman of ch12.


While I consider the Jer passage as entirely relevant to the prophetic imagery being a kind of encapsulation of Eze 16; I cited Ezekiel for the purpose of identifying the woman. Eze 16 is where John is drawing his imagery; for example, the judgment of the woman at Eze 16 is the same as the judgment of the Rev whore; both have their lovers turn on them, strip them naked, burn them, etc. Now while the Jer passage is relevant, it doesn't explicitly give us an identifty; but Ezekiel 16 does, and it is Jerusalem. But Jerusalem is the OT picture of the church; so the church, this is our whore.

I believe we will see this woman come into existence at the coming of the son of perdition; right now we would call her "Babel" but when the King of Babel comes on the 10th day of the 10th month, he comes to build "Great Babel", as it were- with himself as the head of gold. The Great Confusion is this: the church falling away to the King of Confusion, as the head of the church, mistaking him for the King of Peace. It is Eden all over again; the woman beguiled by the serpent; the beginning is a picture of the ending after all.

These two woman represent two versions of God's people, the faithful version (you should note that the woman of ch12 is being protected) and the unfaithful version.

Maybe, but I believe it is one woman: Jerusalem. Well, both just happen to be found in the wilderness, that much is sure. What you call the "faithful woman" I would call the "seed of the woman"- and though I agree that you are right in spirit (that is, that we can contrast these two woman images to represent the faithful and unfaithful) I don't think that is what the words are actually conveying: but they convey that there is one woman who begins beautiful and ends a whore; this woman has a seed which will remain faithful, and fulfil the promise at Eden of the seed which would crush the head of the serpent.


Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by MrCobb
 

As for this post, I refer you to my thread on
The futility of date-setting



In my defense I just have to say that I am not really the one setting the dates here. I'm didn't write the flood account. What I am doing is pointing at some very odd information in the bible and saying, "Okay; the only explanation for the presence of this information is that God is setting dates." So when this stuff starts to happen on these dates, no one is going to be thinking about how I set the dates, they're going to be thinking about how I pointed out that God set the dates.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join