Tumgik
#τομικροβιβλιοτηςαποκαλυψης
eli-kittim · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
The Sign of Jonah: Christ’s Death at Sea
By Eli Kittim
Jonah is the English form of the Hebrew name Yona, which is rendered as Ionas in the Greek. The Ionians were the ancient Greeks (see Josephus Antiquities I, 6). So Ionia means Greece, and an ancient citizen of Ion was called Ionas. So Jonah (Ionas), who is a type of Christ, is depicted as a Greek figure. Let us not forget that Jonah was going to Tarshish, which has been identified as Ancient Greece (see the undermentioned article).
What is more, it seems as if the sign of Jonah is a typological metaphor for Christ’s death and resurrection that is employed by the evangelists in order to demonstrate that Jesus is the Messiah. But, as I will show, it also represents an event in prophetic history, although this has not as yet taken place. In the gospel narrative, Matthew connects Jesus’ death to that of Jonah, after the latter’s body was cast into the sea. Matthew 12:39-40 (NASB) reads thusly:
“An evil and adulterous generation craves a
sign; and so no sign will be given to it except
the sign of Jonah the prophet; for just as
Jonah was in the stomach of the sea
monster for three days and three nights, so
will the Son of Man be in the heart of the
earth for three days and three nights.”
We find analogous parallels and motifs in the Psalms as well. For example, Psalm 69:1-2 reads:
“Save me, God, For the waters have
threatened my life. I have sunk in deep mud,
and there is no foothold; I have come into
deep waters, and a flood overflows me.”
Similarly, Psalm 18:16 says:
“He sent from on high, He took me;
He drew me out of many waters.”
So, Matthew is drawing comparative conclusions between Jonah’s and Jesus's death at sea. Let’s see what happened to Jonah. Jonah 1:15-17 says:
“So they picked up Jonah and hurled him
into the sea, and the sea stopped its raging.
… And the Lord designated a great fish to
swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the
stomach of the fish for three days and three
nights.”
The typological sign of the resurrection is suggested in Jonah 2:10:
“Then the Lord commanded the fish, and it
vomited Jonah up onto the dry land.”
This, then, is the sign of Jonah——which says in effect that God literally “drew … [him] out of many waters”——that Matthew applies to Jesus (cf. Isaiah 43:2)! This is reminiscent of another messianic type who was named “Moses” by Pharaoh's daughter “because … [she] drew him out of the water” (Exod. 2:10). It is also the sign of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. I will not focus on the phrase “three days and three nights” because it will divert us from the topic at hand. Suffice it to say that it need not refer to a literal three-day period. It seems to be a figure of speech that may signify the three-year great tribulation period.
At any rate, the so-called “sign of Jonah” is not simply a metaphor or a unique sign that would establish the deity of Christ, but it is also a factual event! And although I agree with C.S. Lewis who held that Jonah is ahistorical, nevertheless, I believe that the sign of Jonah, as a type, represents the literal, actual death of its antitype: the Messiah! We know that Jonah did not survive. The Book of Jonah 2:2-6 explicitly says that Jonah, after being hurled into the sea, cried out to God “from the depth of Sheol”:
“I called out of my distress to the Lord, And
He answered me. I called for help from the
depth of Sheol; You heard my voice. For You
threw me into the deep, Into the heart of the
seas, And the current flowed around me. All
Your breakers and waves passed over me.
So I said, ‘I have been cast out of Your
sight.’ … Water encompassed me to the
point of death. The deep flowed around me,
Seaweed was wrapped around my head. …
But You have brought up my life from the
pit, Lord my God.”
It’s important to note that the terms “pit” and “Sheol,” in the Hebrew Bible, are references to the realm of the dead (see e.g. Job 7:9; Ps. 49:14-15; 89:48). The resurrection is depicted in Jonah’s own words: “You have brought up my life from the pit, Lord my God.”
So it appears as if the sign of Jonah is also the sign of Christ’s death. Just as Tim Mackie (co-founder of the Bibleproject) explains in one of his sessions that there is a literary redundancy of the word “hurled” in the Jonah text, especially regarding its main character Jonah who is literally “hurled” into the water, I believe that Christ is similarly “hurled” into the water and eaten by a shark. Hence the symbolism of being born in a manger or a feeding trough. This, of course, is closely related to the last supper (i.e. the sacrament of the Eucharist), the idea that Jesus is literally consumed. There are also overtones of Noah's flood in this parallel (cf. Matthew 24:37), as well as of Osiris, who also drowned and whose coffin (like the Ark) floated in the sea (cf. the story of Perseus who was also cast into the sea in a wooden chest).
Another key point is that, according to the Hebrew text, Jonah's fish is not a whale but rather some kind of “great fish". Through special revelation, this appears to be a shark. And the term “swallow”——in the clause, “the Lord designated a great fish to swallow Jonah”——is a euphemism for a great fish feasting on Jonah and consequently fatally injuring him. This, of course, ties in with the idea that we die and are reborn by going under water (Immersion baptism), a symbolic ritual that is unique to Christianity! Hence why Immersion baptism is not only tied to Jonah but is also symbolic of Christ’s death, being re-enacted in the New Testament through the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist!
This study of Jonah takes us back to the origin of the Christian fish symbol, the so-called “ichthys” (ἰχθύς), which is now known as the Jesus fish. And despite the acrostic use of this word: Ἰησοῦ�� Χριστός, Θεοῦ Υἱός, Σωτήρ (i.e. Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour)—— nevertheless, the fish symbolism has a variety of other theological overtones in the New Testament, such as the Feeding of the 5,000 with 2 fishes and 5 loaves, as well as the Feeding of the 4,000 with seven loaves of bread and a few small fish, not to mention that Jesus calls his disciples "fishers of men." That is precisely why Immersion baptism in the early church signified a parallel between fish and converts (i.e. born again Christians). The early Christian theologian Tertullian explained it thusly:
“we, little fishes, after the image of our
Ichthys, Jesus Christ, are born in the water."
3 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
Is Paul Teaching an Imminent Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15:51?
El Kittim
Some commentators have claimed that Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 15:51 is referencing an imminent eschatology. Our primary task is to analyze what the critical Greek New Testament text actually says (not what we would like it to say), and then to ascertain if there are any proofs in it of an imminent eschatology. Let’s start by focusing on a particular verse that is often cited as proof of Paul’s imminent eschatology, namely, 1 Corinthians 15:51. It is alleged that this verse seems to suggest that Paul’s audience in Corinth would live to see the coming of Christ. But we must ask the question:
What in the original Greek text indicates that Paul is referring specifically to his immediate audience in Corinth and not to mankind collectively, which is in Christ? We can actually find out the answer to this question by studying the Greek text, which we will do in a moment.
At any rate, it is often asserted that the clause “We shall not all die" (in 1 Corinthians 15:51) does not square well with a future eschatology. These commentators often end up fabricating an entire fictional scenario that is not even mentioned in the original text. For starters, the plural pronoun “we” seems to be referring to the dead, not to people who are alive in Corinth (I will prove that in a moment). And yet, on the pretext of doing historical criticism, they usually go on to concoct a fictitious narrative (independently of what the text is saying) about how Paul is referring to the people of Corinth who will not die until they see the Parousia.
But, textually speaking, where does 1 Corinthians 15:51 mention the Corinthian audience, the Parousia, or that the Corinthians will still be alive to see it? They have rewritten a novel. None of these fictitious premises can be found in the textual data. Once again, I must ask the same question:
What in the original Greek text indicates that Paul is referring to his audience (which is alive) in Corinth and not to the dead in Christ (collectively)?
We can actually find out the answer to this question by studying the Greek text, which we will do right now!
As I will demonstrate, this particular example does not prove an imminent eschatology based on Paul’s words and phrases. In first Corinthians 15:51, the use of the first person plural pronoun “we” obviously includes Paul by virtue of the fact that he, too, will one day die and rise again. In fact, there is no explicit reference to the rapture or the resurrection taking place in Paul’s lifetime in 1 Corinthians 15:51. In the remainder of this commentary, I will demonstrate the internal evidence (textual evidence) by parsing and exegeting the original Greek New Testament text!
Commentators often claim that the clause “We shall not all die" implies an imminent eschatology. Let’s test that hypothesis. Paul actually wrote the following in 1 Corinthians 15:51 (according to the Greek NT critical text NA28):
πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ
ἀλλαγησόμεθα.
My Translation:
“We will not all sleep, but we will all be
transformed.”
In the original Greek text, there is no separate word that corresponds to the plural pronoun “we.” Rather, we get that pronoun from the case endings -μεθα (i.e. κοιμηθησόμεθα/ἀλλαγησόμεθα). The Greek verb κοιμηθησόμεθα (sleep) is a future passive indicative, first person plural. It simply refers to a future event. But it does not tell us when it will occur (i.e. whether in the near or distant future). We can only determine that by comparing other writings by Paul and the eschatological verbiage that he employs in his other epistles. Moreover, it is important to note that the verb κοιμηθησόμεθα simply refers to a collective sleep. It does not refer to any readers in Corinth!
Similarly, the verb ἀλλαγησόμεθα (we will all be transformed) is a future passive indicative, first person plural. It, too, means that all the dead who are in Christ, including Paul, will not die but be changed/transformed. The event is set in the future, but a specific timeline is not explicitly or implicitly given, or even suggested. Both expressions (i.e. κοιμηθησόμεθα/ἀλλαγησόμεθα) refer to all humankind in Christ or to all the elect that ever lived (including, of course, Paul as well) because both words are preceded by the adjective πάντες, which means “all.” In other words, Paul references “all” the elect that have ever lived, including himself, and says that we will not all perish but be transformed. We must bear in mind that the word πάντες means “all,” and the verb “we will all be changed” (ἀλλαγησόμεθα) refers back to all who sleep in Christ (πάντες κοιμηθησόμεθα). Thus, the pronoun “we,” which is present in the case endings (-μεθα), is simply an extension of the lexical form pertaining to those who sleep (κοιμηθησόμεθα). So, the verb κοιμηθησόμεθα simply refers to all those who sleep. Once again, the adjective πάντες (all/everyone)——in the phrase “We will not all sleep”—— does not refer to any readers in Corinth.
There is not even one reference to a specific time-period in this verse (i.e. when it will happen). Not one. And the plural pronoun “we” specifically refers to all the dead in Christ (πάντες κοιμηθησόμεθα), not to any readers alive in Corinth (eisegesis).
And that is a scholarly exegesis of how we go about translating the meanings of words accurately, while maintaining literal fidelity. It’s also an illustration of why we need to go back to the original Greek text rather than to rely on corrupt, paraphrased English translations (which often include the translators’ theological interpretative biases).
Conclusion
What commentators often fail to realize is that the first person plural pronoun “we” includes Paul because he, too, is part of the elect who will also die and one day rise again. Koine Greek——the language in which Paul wrote his epistles——is interested in the so-called “aspect” (how), not in the “time” (when), of an event. First Corinthians 15:51 does not suggest specifically when the rapture & the resurrection will happen. And it strongly suggests that the plural pronoun “we” is referring to the dead, not to the readers who, by contrast, are alive in Corinth.
Some commentators are simply trying to force their own interpretation that doesn’t actually square well with the grammatical elements of 1 Corinthians 15:51 or with Paul’s other epistles where he explicitly talks about the Day of the Lord (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12) and the last days (1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 3:1 ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις), a time during which the world will look very different from his own. The argument, therefore, that 1 Corinthians 15:51 is referring to an Imminent Eschatology is not supported by the textual data (or the original Greek text).
What is more, if we compare the Pauline corpus with the eschatology of Matthew 24 & 2 Peter 3:10, as well as with the totality of scripture (canonical context), it will become quite obvious that all these texts are talking about the distant future!
If anyone thinks that they can parse the Greek and demonstrate a specific time-period indicated in 1 Corinthians 15:51, or that the phrase “all who sleep” (πάντες κοιμηθησόμεθα) is a reference to the readers in Corinth, please do so. I would love to hear it. Otherwise, this study is incontestable/irrefutable!
The same type of exegesis can be equally applied to 1 Thessalonians 4:15 in order to demonstrate that the verse is not referring to Paul’s audience in Thessalonica, but rather to a future generation that will be alive during the coming of the Lord (but that's another topic for another day):
ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν
παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου.
“we who are alive, who are left until the
coming of the Lord.”
If that were the case——that is, if the New Testament was teaching that the first century Christians would live to see the day of the lord——it would mean that both Paul and Jesus were false prophets who preached an imminent eschatology that never happened.
3 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 10 months
Text
Tumblr media
The Bible Attributes the Hidden Name of God to Greece
Eli kittim
The Greek New Testament Unlocks the Meaning of God’s Name
The meaning of God’s name (YHVH) was originally incoherent and indecipherable until the appearance of the Greek New Testament. In Isaiah 46:11, God says that he will call the Messiah “from a distant country” (cf. Matt. 28:18; 1 Cor. 15:24-25). Similarly, in Matt. 21:43, Jesus promised that the kingdom of God will be taken away from the Jews and given to another nation. That’s why Isaiah 61:9 says that the Gentiles will be the blessed posterity of God (through the messianic seed). Paul also says categorically and unequivocally, “It is not the children of the flesh [the Jews] … but the children of the promise [who] are regarded as descendants [of Israel]” (Rom. 9:6-8).
These passages demonstrate why the New Testament was not written in Hebrew but in Greek. In fact, most of the New Testament books were composed in Greece. The New Testament was written exclusively in Greek, and most of the epistles address Greek communities. Not to mention that the New Testament authors used the Greek Old Testament as their Inspired text and copied extensively from it. That’s also why Christ attributed the divine I AM to the Greek language (alpha and omega). Now why did all this happen? Was it a mere coincidence or an accident, or is it because God’s name is somehow associated with Greece? Let’s explore this question further.
YHVH (I AM)
Initially, God did not disclose the meaning of his name to Moses (Exod. 3:14), but only the status of his ontological being: “I Am.” The four-letter Hebrew theonym יהוה‎ (transliterated as YHVH) is the name of God in the Hebrew Bible, and it’s pronounced as yahva. In Judaism, this name is forbidden from being vocalized or even pronounced.
Hebrew was a consonantal language. Vowels and cantillation marks were devised much later by the Masoretes between the 7th and 10th centuries AD. Thus, to call the divine name Yahva is a rough approximation. We really don’t know how to properly pronounce the name or what it actually means. But, through linguistic and biblical research, we can propose a scholarly hypothesis.
God Explicitly Identifies Himself with the Language of the Greeks
Since God’s name (the divine “I AM”) was revealed in the New Testament vis-à-vis the first and last letters of the Greek writing system (“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end” Rev. 22:13), then it necessarily must reflect a Greek name. The letters Alpha and Omega constitute “the beginning and the end” of the Greek alphabet. Put differently, the creator of the universe (Heb. 1:2) explicitly identifies himself with the language of the Greeks! That explains why the New Testament was written in Greek rather than Hebrew. That’s also why we are told “how God First concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for his name” (Acts 15:14):
“And with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, … ‘THE GENTILES WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME’ “ (Acts 15:15-17).
This is a groundbreaking statement because it demonstrates that God’s name is not derived from Hebraic but rather Gentile sources. The Hebrew Bible asserts the exact same thing:
“All the Gentiles… are called by My name” (Amos 9:12).
The New Testament clearly tells us that God identifies himself with the language of the Greeks: “ ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God” (Rev. 1:8). In the following verse, John is “on the [Greek] island called Patmos BECAUSE of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” (Rev. 1:9 italics mine). We thus begin to realize why the New Testament was written exclusively in Greek, namely, to reflect the Greek God: τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ⸂Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ⸃ (Titus 2:13)! Incidentally, God is never once called Yahva in the Greek New Testament. Rather, he is called Lord (kurios). Similarly, Jesus is never once called Yeshua. He is called Ἰησοῦς, a name which both Cyril of Jerusalem (catechetical lectures 10.13) and Clement of Alexandria (Paedagogus, Book 3) considered to be derived from Greek sources.
Yahva: Semantic and Phonetic Implications
If my hypothesis is accurate, we must find evidence of a Greek linguistic element within the Hebrew name of God (i.e. Yahva) as it was originally revealed to Moses in Exod. 3:14. Indeed, we do! In the Hebrew language, the term “Yahvan” represents the Greeks (Josephus Antiquities I, 6). Therefore, it is not difficult to see how the phonetic and grammatical mystery of the Tetragrammaton (YHVH, commonly pronounced as Yahva) is related to the Hebrew term Yahvan, which refers to the Greeks. In fact, the Hebrew names for both God and Greece (Yahva/Yahvan) are virtually indistinguishable from one another, both grammatically and phonetically! The only difference is in the Nun Sophit (Final Nun), which stands for "Son of" (Hebrew ben). Thus, the Tetragrammaton plus the Final Nun (Yahva + n) can be interpreted as “Son of God.” This would explain why strict injunctions were given that the theonym must remain untranslatable under the consonantal name of God (YV). The Divine Name can only be deciphered with the addition of vowels, which not only point to “YahVan,” the Hebrew name for Greece, but also anticipate the arrival of the Greek New Testament!
There’s further evidence for a connection between the Greek and Hebrew names of God in the Dead Sea Scrolls. In a few Septuagint manuscripts, the Tetragrammaton (YHVH) is actually translated in Greek as ΙΑΩ “IAO” (aka Greek Trigrammaton). In other words, the theonym Yahva is translated into Koine Greek as Ιαω (see Lev. 4:27 LXX manuscript 4Q120). This fragment is dated to the 1st century BC. Astoundingly, the name ΙΑΩΝ is the name of Greece (aka Ἰάων/Ionians/IAONIANS), the earliest literary records of whom can be found in the works of Homer (Gk. Ἰάονες; iāones) and also in the writings of the Greek poet Hesiod (Gk. Ἰάων; iāōn). Bible scholars concur that the Hebrew name Yahvan represents the Iaonians; that is to say, Yahvan is Ion (aka Ionia, meaning “Greece”).
We find further evidence that the Tetragrammaton (YHVH) is translated as ΙΑΩ (IAO) in the writings of the church fathers. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia (1910) and B.D. Eerdmans, Diodorus Siculus refers to the name of God by writing Ἰαῶ (Iao). Irenaeus reports that the Valentinians use Ἰαῶ (Iao). Origen of Alexandria also employs Ἰαώ (Iao). Theodoret of Cyrus writes Ἰαώ (Iao) as well to refer to the name of God.
Summary
Therefore, the hidden name of God in the Septuagint, the New Testament, and the Hebrew Bible seemingly represents Greece! The ultimate revelation of God’s name is disclosed in the Greek New Testament by Jesus Christ who identifies himself with the language of the Greeks: Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ Ἄλφα καὶ τὸ Ὦ (Rev. 1:8). In retrospect, we can trace this Greek name back to the Divine “I am” in Exodus 3:14!
5 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
The Bible Says That The Messiah Will Not Come From Israel ❌❌❌
Eli Kittim
Isaiah Declares That The Messiah Will NOT Come From Israel❗️
In Isaiah 46:11 (KJV), God says: I will bring from a far country the Messiah who will execute my counsel (cf. Matt. 28:18; 1 Cor. 15:24-25):
Calling … the man that executeth my
counsel from a far country: yea, I have
spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have
purposed it, I will also do it.
For further biblical evidence concerning a Gentile Messiah, see the following paper: ⬇️
The Masoretic Text (Old Testament)
In Isaiah 46:11, the Hebrew word מֵאֶ֥רֶץ (mê·’e·reṣ) means “from the land” or “country,” while the word מֶרְחָ֖ק (mer·ḥāq) means “distant place” or “from afar.” Together they mean “from a distant place,” “from afar,” or “from a distant country.” Since God is speaking to the Israelites, it is obvious that the Messiah he has appointed to execute his counsel WILL NOT come from Palestine❗️
Isaiah 46:9-11 reads:
I am God, and there is none like me,
Declaring the end from the beginning, and
from ancient times the things that are not
yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand,
and I will do all my pleasure: Calling … the
man that executeth my counsel from a far
country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also
bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also
do it.
The Greek Old Testament (Septuagint)
This is also recorded in the Greek Old Testament of Isaiah 46:9-11. The LXX uses the word αὐτόν (autón)——which is the accusative masculine singular form of αυτός, meaning “him”——to describe the “man” who will be called “from a land afar off” to execute both God’s counsel and plans! The key word here is πόρρωθεν, which means “from a distance” or “from afar” (see Lk. 17:12; Heb. 11:13). It means that this messianic figure will come from a distant country. He is obviously not a native Israelite! Similarly, in Matt. 21:43, the literary Jesus promised that the kingdom of God will be taken away from the Jews and given to another nation. What is more, the covenant of the seed (in Genesis 12) is a reference to Christ. That is to say, the covenant is through Abraham’s seed, who **is** Christ (see Gal. 3:16). That’s why Isaiah 61:9 says that the Gentiles are the blessed posterity of God (through the messianic seed):
And their seed shall be known among the
Gentiles, and their offspring among the
people: all that see them shall acknowledge
them, that they are the [Messianic] seed
which the LORD hath blessed.
For further proof of a Greek Messianic line, see the following article: ⬇️
God is Called by a Gentile Name

Conclusion
Why is the New Testament written in Greek❓It’s not because it was the lingua franca. It has to do with the identity of the Messiah❗Why does the literary Christ call himself the alpha and the omega (referring to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet)❓Why is John on the Greek island of Patmos to proclaim the testimony of Jesus on the Lord’s day❓ It isn’t because he is in exile. That’s an old wive’s tale… There is much much more that I obviously cannot reproduce, here, due to time constraints.
‘all the Gentiles … are called by My name,’
Says the LORD (Amos 9:12 NKJV).
For additional information on a Gentile Messiah, see the following article: ⬇️

The Evolution of a Gentile Messiah in the Bible

3 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
Is Mara bar Serapion’s Letter a Forgery?
Eli Kittim
The letter has been claimed to include no
Christian themes.
— Wiki
Mara bar Serapion was a stoic philosopher. He is noted for a lengthy letter that he wrote to his son. The letter was composed in Syriac, written sometime between 73 AD and the 3rd century. Many Christian apologists have suggested that Mara bar Serapion is alluding to Jesus Christ in this letter. But there are several problems with that theory.
First, a nonChristian like Mara bar Serapion would never have referred to Jesus as a “king.” Only dedicated and reborn Christians refer to Jesus as their Lord of lords and kings of Kings, not pagans.
Second, Jesus was not known as a “king.” In fact, according to Bruce Chilton and Craig A. Evans (“Studying the Historical Jesus,” pp. 455–457), “the term ‘king of the Jews’ has never been seen in the Christian literature of antiquity as a title for Jesus.”
Third, Jesus was not known as a “wise king.” The only Jew known to be a “wise king” was King Solomon, who was in fact a *king,* and whose *wisdom* was known throughout the ancient world. What is more, King Solomon is well known for being the author of many books of *wisdom* in the Bible.
Fourth, Mara bar Serapion does not even mention the terms “Jesus” or “Christ.” And when referring to famous heroic philosophers who died, and what happened after their death, he never mentions Jesus’ resurrection. Even if he didn’t believe it, he would have, at least, mentioned the *rumor* of Jesus being raised from the dead. The fact that he doesn’t mention it at all means that he’s not talking about Jesus:
[Robert E.] Van Voorst adds two factors
that indicate Mara was not a Christian, the
first being his failure to mention the terms
Jesus or Christ. The second factor (also
supported by Chilton and Evans) is that
Mara's statement that Jesus lives on based
on the wisdom of his teachings, in contrast
to the Christian concept that Jesus
continues to live through his resurrection,
indicates that he was not a Christian.
— Wiki
Fifth, the language of the document suggests that Mara bar Serapion is referring to an actual king who enacted new laws and established new practices. For example, Jewish tradition ascribes ritual hand washing and eruvin to King Solomon, who also served as a Judge (e.g. the “Judgment of Solomon”). He was also responsible for building the first temple, and for instituting new laws of how the temple services would run:
Nay, Socrates did ‘not’ die, because of
Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the
statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King,
because of the new laws which he enacted.
— Wiki
Sixth, there’s something very odd about the reference to the Jews in this letter. This is quite a long letter, which is based entirely on Greek philosophy. Scholars are in agreement that Mara bar Serapion was a Stoic philosopher and a pagan. As a rule, Stoic philosophers held Jewish teachings in contempt, and so they would never have placed them on a par with the teachings of Socrates, Plato, and Pythagoras. We know this from the apostle Paul who was scoffed at when preaching to stoic philosophers in Athens (Acts 17:15-34). The addition of the “Jewish” element, therefore, reads like a non sequitur, like a strange interpolation that doesn’t belong there… It sounds as if someone added it at a later time. And it seems as if the author (or editor?) got things wrong. Pythagoras was not burned, and King Solomon was not killed. And the expulsion of the Jews might be a reference to the deportation of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BC, or to that of Judah in 586 BC:
The letter refers to the unjust treatment of
‘three wise men’: the murder of Socrates,
the burning of Pythagoras, and the
execution of ‘the wise king’ of the Jews.
— Wiki
Now that I have offered my critique, let’s actually read that portion of the letter that apologists have employed time after time as evidence for the historicity of Jesus. Do you think that this pericope constitutes strong evidence for the existence of Jesus? Hardly! Not by a long shot:
For what benefit did the Athenians obtain
by putting Socrates to death, seeing that
they received as retribution for it famine and
pestilence?  Or the people of Samos by the
burning of Pythagoras, seeing that in one
hour the whole of their country was covered
with sand?  Or the Jews by the murder of
their Wise King, seeing that from that very
time their kingdom was driven away from
them?  For with justice did God grant a
recompense to the wisdom of all three of
them.  For the Athenians died by famine;
and the people of Samos were covered by
the sea without remedy; and the Jews,
brought to desolation and expelled from
their kingdom, are driven away into every
land.  Nay, Socrates did “not” die, because
of Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the
statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King,
because of the new laws which he enacted.
— Wiki
4 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
Who or What is the Ark of the Covenant?
Eli Kittim
The Ark of the Covenant was a gold-plated wooden chest that housed the two tablets of the covenant (Heb. 9:4). Jewish folklore holds that the ark of the covenant disappeared sometime around 586 B.C. when the Babylonian empire destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. Throughout the centuries, many writers, novelists, ufologists, and religious authors have invented two kinds of wild and adventurous stories about the ark of the covenant. They either talk about fearless treasure-hunters, archaeologists, and paleographers who went hunting for the Lost Ark of the Covenant, or about ancient alien civilizations that made contact with humans in prehistoric times. This has led some authors to the startling conclusion that the ark of the covenant may have been part of a highly advanced ancient-alien technology. But the Biblical data do not support such outrageous and outlandish conclusions.
From a Biblical standpoint, both the “ark of the covenant” and “Noah’s Ark” are symbols that represent salvation in the death of the Messiah. Isaiah 53:5 reads thusly:
he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;

upon him was the chastisement that
brought us peace, and with his wounds we
are healed.
We can also call it the covenant of salvation based on the atoning death of Christ (Heb. 9:17). If you pay close attention to the biblical symbols and details, you’ll notice that both Noah’s ark and the ark of the covenant represent some type of casket, which signifies the atoning death of the Messiah (that saves humanity). Christ’s covenant is based on his death. Without Christ’s death there is no salvation. That’s what ultimately redeems humanity from death and hell, and allows for resurrection and glorification to occur. Christ, then, is the ark of the covenant, also represented by Noah’s ark (which saves a few faithful humans who believe in God). The caskets are of different sizes. The smaller casket (the ark of the covenant) could only carry one person (the Messiah), whereas the larger one (Noah’s Ark) can accommodate all of humanity (symbolizing those who are baptized into Christ’s death). According to the Book “After the Flood,” by Bill Cooper, “The Hebrew word for ark, tebah, may be related to the Egyptian word db't, = ‘coffin.’ “ Romans 6:3 declares:
Do you not know that all of us who have
been baptized into Christ Jesus were
baptized into his death?
In other words, it’s not Christ’s incarnation but rather his death that saves humanity. All those who follow him and are baptized into his death are saved!
How is Christ the “ark of the covenant”? Christ is the Word of God (Jn 1:1), the Logos, or the Law of God (the Torah)! That’s why the ark of the covenant doesn’t dwell on earth but in heaven. Rev 11:19 reads:
Then God’s temple in heaven was opened,
and the ark of his covenant was seen within
his temple. There were flashes of lightning,
rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake,
and heavy hail.
Who dwells within God’s throne-room, within God’s temple, and is represented by the ark of the covenant? Answer: Jesus Christ❗️A similar scenario takes place in Revelation 21:2-3:
And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem,
coming down out of heaven from God,
prepared as a bride adorned for her
husband. And I heard a loud voice from the
throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of
God is with man. He will dwell with them,
and they will be his people, and God himself
will be with them as their God.’
Notice that the terms “God” and “the dwelling place of God” are used interchangeably. In other words, the metaphors of the dwelling place, the tent of meeting (ἡ σκηνὴ τοῦ θεοῦ; i.e. the tabernacle), the temple and its sacrificial system, as well as the ark of the covenant, all represent God and signify the blood of the covenant or the blood of the lamb (1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 7:14; 12:11)! Christ is not only the mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5), but also the high priest who offers up his own life for the salvation of humanity (Heb. 7:17). According to Acts 4:12, there is “no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved”: not Moses, or Muhammad, or Buddha, or Krishna, or Confucius, or Allah, or Yahweh. According to Philippians 2:10-11:
at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow, in heaven and on earth and under the
earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father.
Therefore, he who is within the throne-room of God, and “among the people,” is none other than the Second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, who “will dwell with them” forevermore (Rev. 21:3). It’s a throwback to Leviticus, which prophesied the incarnation of God, but which the Jews misunderstood and misinterpreted. Leviticus 26:12:
I will be ever present in your midst: I will be
your God, and you shall be My people.
Compare Revelation 21.3:
He will dwell with them, and they will be his
people, and God himself will be with them
as their God.
2 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11
Eli Kittim
The Two Witnesses are Anointed with Power
In Rev. 11:4, the two witnesses on earth are said to be “the two olive trees” of the Lord. This verse is based on the Old Testament:
These are the two anointed ones who stand
by the Lord of the whole earth.
— Zechariah 4:14
The term “Messiah” (Gk. Christos) is derived from the Hebrew word “mashiach,” which means “anointed one.” So, Zechariah 4:14 cannot be talking about anyone else except the Messiah. As I will demonstrate, these two anointed witnesses could be none other than Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. And these two are one! The Holy Spirit is often called the “Spirit of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:19), the “Spirit of Jesus” (Acts 16:7), or “the Spirit of His Son” (Gal. 4:6). We know that the Messiah is the “anointed one” (Dan. 9:26). But the Holy Spirit is “anointed” as well (1 Jn 2:20, 27), and anoints Jesus with power (see Lk 4:18; Acts 10:38). The anointing takes place when Jesus and the Holy Spirit become one (during Jesus’ baptism)! It is Jesus’ rebirth, so to speak, when the Holy Spirit enters him and anoints him with power (Lk 3:22; cf. Acts 2:1-4)!
As for those thinkers who take issue with this view, claiming that the two witnesses are probably Enoch and Elijah who never died, there are three problems with their theory. First, regardless of whether a biblical character died or not, scripture makes it clear that you only live once (Heb. 9:27); there is no reincarnation. A reincarnation of Enoch or Elijah is therefore out of the question. Second, neither Enoch nor Elijah were the anointed Messiah. Third, both of these fictional characters are “types” who represent and foreshadow the Messiah. Notice the specific typology that is presented in Revelation 11 which typifies the two witnesses’ unique relation and connection to Jesus: the two witnesses are said to prophesy in the exact same place where Jesus supposedly lived, and they will die in the exact same city where Jesus allegedly died. I think you can guess the rest of the script: “But after … three … days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet” (Rev. 11:11). Just like Jesus, they’ll be miraculously raised from the dead after 3 days!
Moreover, Rev. 11:6 says that the two witnesses have tremendous authority (ἐξουσίαν) over heaven and earth to do as they please. However, only Jesus has that kind of authority. No one else! Jesus says: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Mt. 28:18):
Ἐδόθη μοι πᾶσα ἐξουσία ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ
τῆς γῆς ·
Both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are called Witnesses
What is more, the two witnesses’ assignment is to bear witness to the truth (μαρτυρίαν; Rev. 11:7). The two persons of the Godhead who bear witness (μαρτυρήσει) to the truth on earth are Jesus and the Holy Spirit (see Jn 15:26; 18:37; Rom. 8:16; Heb. 10:15 [Μαρτυρεῖ/bears witness]). Case in point. First John 5:6 mentions the witness of the Spirit——namely, that God comes in the flesh——using the symbols of “water and blood” which represent the divinity and humanity of Jesus, thus indicating that he’s both God and man:
This man, Jesus the Messiah, is the one
who came by water and blood—not with
water only, but with water and with blood.
The Spirit is the one who verifies this,
because the Spirit is the truth.
Then, 1 John 5:7-8 goes on to explain that “these three [witnesses] are one”:
For there are three witnesses
[μαρτυροῦντες] — the Spirit, the water, and
the blood—and these three are one.
— 1 John 5:7-8
And 1 Jn 5:9 tells us that the *content* of this prophetic witness (ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ) concerns the coming of the Son of God in human form at some point in human history. The Greek verb ἐλθὼν (came) is not referring to the time of action, but rather to the Christological prophecy which is supposed to take place according to the scriptures (cf. 1 Cor. 15:3-4). So the *testimony* of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 is about the parousia, or the coming of Jesus to this earth! Interestingly enough, Rev. 1:5 calls Jesus “the faithful witness” (ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός). This is reiterated in Rev. 3:14 where Jesus is “the faithful and true witness.” Both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are said to be God’s *two witnesses,* and these two are one! Since no one else except God can do these extraordinary miracles (e.g. fire-breathing, controlling the weather & the sea [cf. Mk 4:39], causing plagues; Rev. 11:5-6), and given that the language of the Greek New Testament is pointing to the authority, anointing, and witness of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, there can be little doubt as to who these two witnesses are.
First Comes Christ; Then Comes the Antichrist
The *sequence* of end-time events also reveals New Testament parallels and verbal agreements that are consistent with the notion that the Messiah will come first, followed by the antichrist. Notice the same sequence in Rev. 11:7:
And when they have finished their witness,
the beast that comes up out of the abyss
will make war with them and overcome
them and kill them.
This is essentially the same sequence that we find in 2 Thess. 2. The restrainer must first be taken out of the way before the lawless one can be revealed (2 Thess. 2:7-8). In other words, the restrainer must be removed before the antichrist can appear on the world stage. This same motif is repeated in Rev. 12:3-4 (italics mine):
a great RED dragon, with seven heads and
ten horns [representing the Antichrist and
the final world empire] … stood before the
woman who was about to give birth, so that
when she bore her child he might devour it.
The way Rev. 12:5 is described, it’s as if it gives us Jesus’ birth, resurrection, and ascension, minus his death (which is alluded to in verse 4):
She gave birth to a male child, one who is to
rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her
child was caught up to God and to his
throne.
So, in Rev. 12, the male child is born first, and then the RED dragon kills it. It’s the exact same sequence in Rev. 6. First comes the peaceful white horseman “holding a bow” (representing the covenant; see Gen. 9:13 LXX) and wearing the Stephanos crown, which is typically worn by victors in Christ (Jas. 1:12; 2 Tim. 4:8; 1 Pet. 5:4; Rev. 2:10; 4:4), and then comes the RED horse which triggers World War III (Rev. 6:3). We find the exact same sequence in Rev. 11:7. First come the two witnesses, and then comes the beast out of the abyss to kill them. This is the antichrist who must come after Christ. It’s the exact same motif in 2 Thess. 2:7-8 in which the restrainer must be killed before the antichrist can appear.
So, there’s a running theme throughout the New Testament which repeats the same end-time sequence in all these narratives, namely, the idea that Christ comes first, followed by the Antichrist! Thus, Christ’s coming is imminent (it can happen at any time)! But how is all this possible if Christ already died two thousand years ago? It’s possible because the gospels are not historical documents that correspond to real historical events. They’re theological narratives that are largely based on the Old Testament. By contrast, the epistles, which are the more explicit and didactic portions of scripture, say that Christ will die “once for all” (Gk. ἅπαξ hapax) “at the end of the age” (Heb. 9:26b), a phrase which consistently refers to the end of the world (cf. Mt. 13:39-40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Similarly, just as Heb. 1:2 says that the physical Son speaks to humanity in the “last days,” 1 Pet. 1:20 (NJB) demonstrates the eschatological timing of Christ’s *initial* appearance by saying that he will be “revealed at the final point of time.” In other words, Revelation 6:2, 11:3, 12:5, and 19:11 all refer to the FIRST COMING of Jesus at the end of days❗️
4 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
The Antichrist is Russian: Not Assyrian, Muslim, Or Jewish
By Independent Researcher 🎓 Eli Kittim
The Connection Between Daniel’s 4 empires & Russia
Daniel chapters 2 & 7 show 4 super empires, the last of which will last until the end of the world. According to history, we know that the first was Babylon (gold), the second was Medo-Persia (silver), the third was Greece (bronze), and the fourth was Rome (iron), which had 2 legs (representing East & West). Then, Daniel says that the 10 toes represent the final phase of that same empire (i.e. a revived Roman Empire), which the endtimes Christ will smash to pieces. We also know that the 2 legs of the Roman Empire were Rome and Constantinople. Rome (West) was sacked and conquered in the 5th century AD and ceased to be an empire. There was no western Roman Empire in the 6th, 7th, and 8th centuries. According to Voltaire, “The Holy Roman Empire [of the 9th century] was neither Holy nor Roman, nor an Empire.” In fact, according to Wiki, “The exact term ‘Holy Roman Empire’ was not used until the 13th century.” So, the only remaining and legitimate Roman empire was the one at Constantinople, namely, the Eastern Roman Empire, aka Byzantium (East). So far, we are still talking about the 2 iron legs of Daniel’s composite statue. Then, in 1453, the Turks sacked Constantinople, and most of the Byzantine elites fled north to Moscow, where Moscow became the third Rome.
Chuck Missler pointed out that most commentators think that the Antichrist will come from the west (Rome), that is Europe, but they neglect the Eastern leg of the Roman Empire, namely Constantinople. And he was right. The Antichrist comes from the eastern part of the Roman Empire that moved to Moscow! In addition, Ivan the Great adopted the official emblem of the Byzantine Monarchy: the double-headed eagle. He then went on to marry Sophia Paleologue, the niece of the final Byzantine ruler Constantine XI. In the aftermath of the Ottoman Turks’ conquest of the Eastern Roman Empire and in an effort to salvage the last vestiges of Christianity, Ivan designated Moscow as the Third Rome in 1497 A.D. In effect, Moscow became the offspring of the Roman Empire; heirs to the legacy. Russia, then, becomes the link of the little horn (Antichrist) to the Roman Empire (cf. Daniel 7:7-8 f.). Ivan even called himself Tsar, which means “Caesar.” And he inherited all the symbols of Byzantium, including the Greek Orthodox Church. Russia is therefore the continuation of Daniel’s empires, or the revived Roman Empire after the 2 proverbial iron legs collapsed.
Mind you, Daniel only mentions a revived Roman Empire out of which the little horn will come. He doesn’t mention any Muslim or Assyrian nations. He doesn’t mention anything about a Jewish antichrist. For proper exegesis, we have to stick to the text of Daniel, not to what people are currently adding to it. And Daniel only alludes to a revived Roman Empire. So the notion of an Assyrian, Muslim, or Jewish antichrist is foreign to the text and completely bogus and misinformed.
Moreover, we know that the book of Daniel is referring to the endtimes——and that this revived Roman Empire will appear in the last days——because Daniel 12.4 talks explicitly about the endtimes, while Daniel 12.1 mentions the great tribulation which will be the worst event that has ever occurred on planet earth, and one that has not yet happened. We also know that the 10 final leaders will fight Jesus Christ (Rev. 17.14) and that the Antichrist will be annihilated by Christ himself at his coming (see 2 Thess. 2.8). So the little horn of Daniel is definitely a future antichrist!
The 7 empires of Revelation 17
Just to recap, Revelation 17.9-13 says that there will be 7 empires until the end of time. There will also be an 8th, but because it’s part of the seven, it’s not counted as an 8th. So let’s enumerate them. It’s not Assyria or Egypt, as some unskilled interpreters suggest. Daniel doesn’t mention them at all. Historically, the 7 empires are as follows: 1) Babylon, 2) Medo-Persia, 3) Greece, 4) Rome, 5) Constantinople, 6) Moscow, 7) Soviet Union (USSR), 8) Russian Federation, which is part of the 7, and is therefore still part of the 7th empire. And all this takes place in the endtimes because Rev. 17.14 says:
These will wage war against the Lamb, and
the Lamb will overcome them.
Remember that John “was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day” (Rev. 1.10), not physically in the body. And he heard and saw visions pertaining to the day of the Lord. So when he says——there “are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while,” (Rev. 17.10)——the one that exists (or the “one [that] is”) during this prophetic time period that John sees is not Rome (which was the 4th empire), but rather the 6th (Moscow)! Why Russia? Because John is “in the Spirit on the Lord’s day” (Rev. 1.10). He is showing us where the Antichrist comes from. He is giving us a prophetic clue. That’s exactly why the 7th empire “has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while.” That would be the USSR, which remained a little while, approximately only 70 years.
Here’s the passage in Rev. 17: 9-14:
Here is the mind which has wisdom. The
seven heads are seven mountains upon
which the woman sits, and they are seven
kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has
not yet come; and when he comes, he must
remain a little while. The beast which was,
and is not, is himself also an eighth and is
one of the seven, and he goes to
destruction. The ten horns which you saw
are ten kings who have not yet received a
kingdom, but they receive authority as kings
with the beast for one hour. These have one
purpose, and they give their power and
authority to the beast. These will wage war
against the Lamb, and the Lamb will
overcome them because He is Lord of lords
and King of kings.
The 10 toes at the bottom of Daniel’s statue represent the 10 leaders that will emerge out of this revived Roman Empire. And the 7th great superpower that emerged out of Russia was the Soviet Union. After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, 3 more figures emerged, totalling 10 leaders, plus an 11th (Putin), exactly as foretold in Daniel’s prophecy (Dan 7.19-22). The “three of the previous horns [that] were plucked out” (Dan. 7.8) represent the 3 leaders of the Russian Federation which came out of Soviet Russia.
THE 10 KINGS OF DANIEL 7.20 & REVELATION 17.12
From its inception in 1917 until 1991, the Soviet Union had 8 leaders:
1) Vladimir Lenin
2) Joseph Stalin
3) Georgy Malenkov
4) Nikita Khrushchev
5) Leonid Brezhnev
6) Yuri Andropov
7) Konstantin Chernenko
8) Mikhail Gorbachev
The succeeding Russian Federation has only had 3 leaders since its formation on December 25, 1991 (cf. Daniel 7.8):
9) Boris Yeltsin, 10) Dmitry Medvedev, and
11) Vladimir Putin!
There you have it. Putin is the 11th horn (the 11th king) of Daniel 7.20, “to make room for which three [kings] . . . fell out” (emphasizing the last 3 leaders of the new federal republic that arose out of the former USSR)!
Ezekiel 38: The War of Gog & Magog
We have much more evidence that Ezekiel 38 is referring to Russia not only because of historical studies but also because of the language that is used in the Septuagint, not to mention the evidence from Josephus and other historians linking the inhabitants of Magog to the Scythians. The evidence pointing to Russia is overwhelming. For further evidence, see the following article:
What’s more, Ezekiel 38 talks about Russia invading countries in the last days, the so-called Gog/Magog war. That’s why the Septuagint (LXX) of Ezekiel 38.2 has the words Ρώς and Μοσόχ that stand for Ρωσία and Μόσχα in Greek, which are translated as Russia and Moscow respectively❗️ Thus, it’s the Eastern rather than the Western leg of the Roman Empire that is considered to be Daniel’s Revived Roman Empire of Bible Prophecy, which was supplanted by Russia after the fall of Byzantium in 1453. And, as I have shown, Russia is also the final empire of Revelation 17, the one with the aforementioned ten kings!
This is the most accurate exegetical explanation of the 10 horns (which also includes the 11th horn, the Antichrist) and the only one that fits with all the details in the prophecies of Daniel 2 & 7, Ezekiel 38, Luke 21, and Revelation 12 & 17. That’s why the final empire is depicted as a red 7-headed dragon with 10 horns in Revelation 12. It’s the exact same Red Empire of the USSR that has morphed and continues to the present day. See the second seal of revelation, the red horse, which represents the Russian empire that will take peace away from the earth by starting world war 3!
Besides the fact that this position solves the biblical puzzle completely, one can also see that the current events fit perfectly as well. Russia is allied with Turkey, Iran, and many Muslim nations, just as prophesied in Ezekiel 38, and Putin has begun his military invasion of the west and is repeatedly threatening **nuclear war.** in fact, in New York City, ads about what to do in case of a nuclear explosion have begun to be seen on television. You have to be literally asleep not to notice that Putin is the person who has begun to invade countries and threaten **nuclear war,** and that a Russian Antichrist has already been foretold in the Bible❗️Daniel 8.23 calls the Antichrist “a master of intrigue” (i.e. “proficient at deception” [ISV]), while Daniel 8.25 (NLT) refers to him as “a master of deception,” obviously implying that he’s trained in secret plans, underhand plots and schemes. In short, a spy! So, you can, in effect, hold the Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other, and they match❗️
Not to notice either the Bible prophecies or the current geopolitical situation of the world, and the constant threat of nuclear war, is equal to being completely ignorant and misinformed❗️ Now let’s look at some faulty and erroneous interpretations that are not based on Daniel or Revelation, or on the canonical context. I will not even bother refuting the Seventh-Day Adventist position——that the Antichrist is the Pope and that the Mark of the Beast is Sunday-observance of the Sabbath——since it is too ridiculous for any one to take seriously, and also because it falls of its own accord.
The Assyrian VS. the Russian Antichrist
The Bible never links the Antichrist to a Muslim country. All lines of evidence link him to a revived Roman Empire. In Isaiah 10.5, for example, the text uses the term Asshur (Assyria)——which once invaded the northern kingdom of Israel——as a type, or symbol, of the final Antichrist who will invade Israel in the latter years (see Ezek. 38). You can’t just take a literal historical figure in the Bible and claim they are the Antichrist. That is not a credible exegesis. If that were so, then we can equally say that Cyrus was the messiah, and not Jesus Christ. Cyrus is called God’s anointed in Isaiah 45.1. Besides, the name Asshur or Assyrian may be a cryptic *anagram* for “Russia,” or for the word “Russian.” The word Asshur can also be used as a semordnilap, a word that has a different meaning when read in reverse (or backwards). For example, Asshur in reverse is Ruhssa (i.e. Russia)! Today, it is laughable to think that Syria, Iraq, Iran, or Turkey will become superpowers and take over the world. They don’t fit the bill. They’re neither Roman, nor do they have the necessary qualifications (11 kings). Yet Revelation 13 says that the Antichrist will conquer, subjugate, and control the entire world. Only a superpower like Russia, allied with many powers, such as China, can achieve these aims. Moreover, the Biblical evidence always points to Russia, as I have already demonstrated! There are many hermeneutical mistakes in the Assyrian interpretation. For example, Daniel never mentions any other kingdom in connection to the little horn besides the Roman Empire (see Daniel 7.23-25). Still others argue that the antichrist comes from the 3rd kingdom (the Hellenistic empire). But the Hellenistic connection in Daniel 8 simply points back to Byzantium because *tiny Thrace* (the symbol of the little horn with its ruler General Lysimachus) later became the seat of the Byzantine Romans, namely, Constantinople. So we’re back to Daniel 7 again. These interpreters confuse the details with the big picture, as well as Daniel’s chronological sequence of succeeding empires. Daniel chapter 8 is simply *zooming in* to give us some specific details. But Daniel chapters 2 & 7 give us *the big picture* and cannot be ignored because they clearly indicate a 4th kingdom that will arise AFTER Greece, out of which the little horn will come (Dan. 7.24)!
And modern day Iran is not Assyria. Both names (Assyria & Persia) are clearly distinguished in the Old Testament as 2 separate and distinct nations. Assyria (not Persia) is the nation that attacked the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 BC (2 Kings 17:3–6), while Iran is called “Persia,” not Assyria, in Ezek. 38.5❗️Today, both Syria and Iraq (which were once part of ancient Assyria) are in ruins. Neither one of them is a superpower that can take over the world (Rev 13). Many interpreters are deliberately ignoring the Book of Daniel, which speaks of the little horn coming out of one of the 2 legs of the Roman Empire. Daniel doesn’t imply anything other than the Roman empire. To add extra-Biblical material about “Muslims” (which are not in the text) is not a proper methodology. And these misleading interpreters don’t know history either, how, for instance, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD, Moscow became the Third Rome. Moscow adopted the Byzantine customs, rituals & religion, as well as the doubleheaded eagle as their insignia, & the Russian leaders called themselves czars, which means “Caesar.” In fact, the double-headed eagle, which has Byzantine antecedents, is still in the coat of arms of Russia!
That’s why the Septuagint (LXX) of Ezekiel 38.2 has the words Ρώς and Μοσόχ in Greek that stand for Ρωσία and Μόσχα, which are translated as Russia and Moscow respectively❗️ This is the nation that will invade Israel and conquer it “in the last days” (Ezek. 38.16). So, the interpreters who advance the theory of an Assyrian Antichrist are obviously ignorant of the historical studies that link this great end-times Ezekiel 38 invasion to Russia❗️
There are many other prophecies that support Ezek. 38, and link Russia to the 7-headed dragon with 10 horns (cf. Rev. 12), just as the sequence of Daniel’s empires leads to a seventh and final empire in Rev. 17. Starting from Babylon in Daniel 2, the USSR was the 7th empire, and there have been 10 leaders since Lenin, with Putin being the 11th, the so-called “little horn.” Hence why these “ten kings receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour [one century]” (Rev. 17.12)! That’s the last days seven-headed empire with 10 horns. Which other nation can fit the bill? None! Once you have the pieces of the exegetical puzzle together, you can zero in on the Antichrist❗️
The interpreters who opt for a Muslim or Assyrian antichrist don’t have a single shred of proof to refute the multiple lines of evidence I’ve just unpacked. All they’re basing it on is a single word (Assyrian) that they’re MISINTERPRETING out-of-context by reading it as a **literal** interpretation. And if the Antichrist is Iranian——as some interpreters have proposed, based on Shia Islam’s belief in a coming Islamic Messiah, the 12th Imam, who will rule for 7 years——then why is Cyrus the Iranian called God’s Messiah? See how ridiculous this eisegesis is❓They’re saying that the Iranian is both the Antichrist and the Messiah❗️Therefore, should we be praying to the Iranian❓
The 10 Horns Are 10 Human Kings (not 10 spirits)
Then there are some who have proposed that the 10 kings are not Humans but Spirits. However, both Dan. 7.9 & 7.11 do not refer to a spirit but rather to a *human being* that is represented by a “horn” (in this case, the little horn). In fact, in Daniel 7.24, in the Old Testament, Daniel asks the angel what the 10 horns are. Here’s the angel’s reply:
As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten
kings shall arise, and another shall arise
after them.
Notice that they don’t come out of different kingdoms but out of the same kingdom. Moreover, the 10 horns represent 10 actual kings, not 10 spirits. This is multiply attested in the New Testament as well. In Rev 17.12-14, the angel provides an interpretation in which the 10 kings are not only human but they will also go to war against Christ:
And the ten horns that you saw are ten
kings who have not yet received a kingdom,
but they are to receive authority as kings for
one hour, together with the beast. These
are united in yielding their power and
authority to the beast; they will make war
on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer
them, for he is Lord of lords and King of
kings.
Moreover, in referring to the figure that we call the “Antichrist,” Daniel 7.20 describes an actual human being, not a spirit, who will control the earth for 3 and a half years (cf. Rev. 11.2; 13.5). What is more, Daniel 7.25 is rather explicit that it’s a male figure (not a spirit) who will blaspheme God and who will persecute the faithful:
He shall speak words against the Most
High, shall wear out the holy ones of the
Most High, and shall attempt to change the
sacred seasons and the law; and they shall
be given into his power for a time, two
times, and half a time.
Further evidence can be found in Revelation 13.18, which tells us that 666 is the number of a human being. It says that 666 is the number of ἀνθρώπου (a human being/ not a spirit, which would have been “pneuma” in Koine Greek if that were the case). And it also refers to him as a male figure (αὐτοῦ), which is a personal/possessive pronoun, genitive masculine 3rd person singular (him/his).
So we’re talking about a man, not a spirit. Second Thessalonians 2.3 calls him the “lawless one” who will be revealed on the world stage, and verse 2.4 goes on to say “that he takes his seat in the temple of God, declaring himself to be God.” These are actual events that will take place by a real ipso facto human being (the so-called “Antichrist”; 1 Jn 2.18).
Conclusion
The 7 heads are seven empires, the last of which is Russia, which, according to Ezekiel 38, will invade Israel with a large coalition. Watch this short video:
youtube
This invasion is also prophesied in Zechariah 14 and Luke 21 as well. Astonishingly, the incumbent president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, came to power at the turn of the century, in 1999 [666], which also marks the end of a thousand-year period. This important timeframe coincides with a Biblical prophecy in which the Antichrist will not appear “until the thousand years . . . [have] ended” (Rev. 20.3, 7-8)!
So when you see references to the red 7-headed dragon with 10 horns, for example, in Revelation 12, it is a reference to Russia as the final world empire that will dominate the world and create a New World Order (Rev 13)❗️
5 notes · View notes
eli-kittim · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
The Da Vinci Code Versus The Gospels
By Eli Kittim 🎓
Bart Ehrman was once quoted as saying: “If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it.” This is an amusing anecdote that I’d like to use as a springboard for this short essay to try to show that it’s impossible to separate literary characters from the literature in which they are found. For example, when Ehrman says, “If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it,” his comment presupposes that James is a real historical figure. But how can we affirm the historicity of a literary character offhand when the so-called “history” of this character is solely based on, and intimately intertwined with, the literary New Testament structures? And if these literary structures are not historical, what then? The fact that the gospels were written anonymously, and that there were no eyewitnesses and no firsthand accounts, and that the events in Jesus’ life were, for the most part, borrowed from the Old Testament, seems to suggest that they were written in the literary genre known as theological fiction. After all, the gospels read like Broadway plays!
Let me give you an analogy. Dan Brown writes novels. All his novels, just like the gospels, contain some historical places, figures, and events. But the stories, in and of themselves, are completely fictional. So, Ehrman’s strawman argument is tantamount to saying that if we want to examine the historicity of Professor Robert Langdon——who is supposedly a Harvard University professor of history of art and symbology——we’ll have to focus on his relationship with Sophie Neveu, a cryptologist with the French Judicial Police, and the female protagonist of the book. Ehrman’s earlier anecdote would be akin to saying: “if Robert Langdon did not exist, you would think Sophie would know it.”
But we wouldn’t know about Robert Langdon if it wasn’t for The Da Vinci Code. You can’t separate the character Robert Langdon from The Da Vinci Code and present him independently of it because he’s a character within that book. Therefore, his historicity or lack thereof depends entirely on how we view The Da Vinci Code. If The Da Vinci Code turns out to be a novel (which in fact it is), then how can we possibly ask historians to give us their professional opinions about him? It’s like asking historians to give us a historical assessment of bugs bunny? Was he real? So, as you can see, it’s all based on the literary structure of The Da Vinci Code, which turns out to be a novel!
By comparison, the historicity of Jesus depends entirely on how we view the literary structure of the gospel literature. Although modern critical scholars view the gospels as theological documents, they, nevertheless, believe that they contain a historic core or nucleus. They also think that we have evidence of an oral tradition. We do not! There are no eyewitnesses and no firsthand accounts. All we have about the life and times of Jesus are the gospel narratives, which were composed approximately 40 to 70 years after the purported events by anonymous Greek authors who never met Jesus. And they seem to be works of theological fiction. So where is the historical evidence that these events actually happened? We have to believe they happened because the gospel characters tell us so? It’s tantamount to saying that the events in The Da Vinci Code actually happened because Robert Langdon says so. But if the story is theological, so are its characters. Thus, the motto of the story is: don’t get caught up in the characters. The message is much more important! As for those who look to Josephus’ Antiquities for confirmation, unfortunately——due to the obvious interpolations——it cannot be considered authentic. Not to mention that Josephus presumably would have been acquainted with the gospel stories, most of which were disseminated decades earlier.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not trying to downplay the seriousness of the gospel message. I’m simply trying to clarify it. The gospels are inspired, but they were never meant to be taken literally. I’m also a believer and I have a high view of scripture. The message of Christ is real. But when will the Jesus-story play out is not something the gospels can address. Only the epistles give us the real Jesus!
1 note · View note
eli-kittim · 14 days
Text
Is Paul Teaching an Imminent Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15:51?
Koine Greek——the language in which Paul wrote his epistles——is interested in the so-called “aspect” (how), not in the “time” (when), of an event. First Corinthians 15:51 does not suggest specifically when the rapture & the resurrection will happen. And it strongly suggests that the plural pronoun “we” is referring to the dead, not to the readers who, by contrast, are alive in Corinth. The argument, therefore, that 1 Corinthians 15:51 is referring to an imminent eschatology is not supported by the original Greek text. What is more, if we compare the Pauline corpus with the eschatology of Matthew 24 & 2 Peter 3:10, as well as with the totality of scripture, it will become quite obvious that all these texts are talking about the distant future!
youtube
0 notes
eli-kittim · 22 days
Text
Tumblr media
Who is the False Prophet of Revelation?
Eli Kittim
Binary Patterns
The Bible often uses binary patterns by introducing two important figures who turn out to be one single individual. For example, a binary pattern can be seen in the Old Testament’s (OT) presentation of the two Messiahs in Judaism: one is a high priest, the other is an anointed king of the Davidic line (cf. Zech. 4:14). The two Messiahs can also be found in the Apocryphal literature, such as in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Damascus Covenant. However, in the New Testament (NT), these two Messiahs are morphed into one priestly/kingly figure: Jesus, the Son of God (cf. Heb. 4:14 and Mt. 2:1–2).
The same is true of the two witnesses in the NT. In order to understand the identity of the two witnesses in Rev. 11:3-12, we must first trace them back to the Hebrew Bible from which they emerge (Zech. 4:14). So when we trace the identity of the two witnesses back to the OT and the context in which they appear, we find that they represent the two Messiahs of Rabbinic Judaism. But these two figures later became coalesced, commingled into one, in the figure of Jesus Christ, who’s given the titles of king and high priest in the order of Melchizedek, who is also a king and priest (Heb. 7:13-17). Therefore, the two witnesses appear to represent the coming Messiah: Jesus Christ (cf. Mal. 4:5; Rev. 6:2)!
The Earth & the Sea
First Jn 5:6 uses the symbols of “water and blood” to represent the divinity and humanity of Jesus, thus indicating that he’s both God and man. The “water” symbolizes the divinity of Jesus, while the blood symbolizes his humanity. Thus, water symbolizes the spirit, while blood symbolizes the flesh.
Now let’s look at the serpent of Gen. 3, which is later identified as the devil or Satan, who is also known as “the great dragon.” Revelation 12:9 says that he will be incarnated on earth:
“And the great dragon was thrown down,
that ancient serpent, who is called the devil
and Satan, the deceiver of the whole
world—he was thrown down to the earth,
and his angels were thrown down with him.”
Isaiah 27:1 alludes to the “the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12) by portraying their ruler (i.e. the serpent/dragon) as residing “in the sea”:
“In that day the LORD with his hard and
great and strong sword will punish
Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the
twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon
that is in the sea.”
Just as 1 Jn 5:6 uses the symbols of “water and blood” to represent the spiritual and human domains, so the description of the two Beasts in Rev. 13—-one “rising out of the sea,” the other “out of the earth”——may be used in a similar fashion to describe the spiritual and earthly realms, respectively. In other words, the reference may be to a single individual who possesses two natures: a human & a spiritual one. Let’s not forget that in heaven, within the Throne Room of God, a sea is explicitly mentioned in Rev. 4:6 (cf. Gen. 1:7).
The Unholy Trinity
According to Rev. 13:4, the whole world “worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast” (i.e. the Antichrist). Yet notice that the second Beast (i.e. the False Prophet), who came out of the earth mimicked Christ because he “had two horns like a lamb … [but] spoke like a dragon” (Rev. 13:11). The point is that just as the two messiahs and the two witnesses represent one person, so the False prophet and the Antichrist may be one and the same person as well. The Book of Daniel doesn’t mention two Antichrists but rather one, namely, the “little horn” (Dan. 7:8; 8:9-12).
First Jn 4:1 associates false prophets with unclean spirits which have been unleashed in the world. Rev. 16:13 reads:
“And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the
dragon and out of the mouth of the beast
and out of the mouth of the false prophet,
three unclean spirits like frogs.”
The Dragon, the Beast, and the False prophet seemingly represent an unholy Trinity in which these three persons are one being, just like the Holy Trinity represents one being, not a plurality of beings. The Devil, the Beast, and the False prophet appear to be three manifestations or three modes that represent Satan, his spirit, and his incarnation.
False prophets in the OT
Surprisingly, we don’t find the phrase “false prophet” in the OT, but there are nevertheless references to many false prophets. The Septuagint (LXX) talks about the priests and the false prophets (ἱερεῖς καὶ ψευδοπροφῆται), and often links them together. The term ἱερεύς in this context refers to a priest, one who offers sacrifices to a god, an idol, or an evil spirit. So the LXX suggests that the false prophets are priestly insofar as they encourage the worship of idols (cf. Zech 13:2). Jeremiah 34:9-10 (LXX) associates false prophets with divination, enchantments, clairvoyance, dreams, sorceries, and with lies. Similarly, in the NT, false prophets are magicians, sorcerers, & illusionists (cf. Acts 13:6). This is reminiscent of 2 Thess. 2:9-11 in which the Antichrist “will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie.” Likewise, in the Hebrew Bible, the false prophets are prophesying lying wonders and working miracles (see Exod. 7:8-13; Jer. 6:13). In the NT, they even rise from the dead (Rev. 13:3) and perform “great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth” (Rev. 13:13) in order to deceive if possible even the elect (Mt. 24:24).
False Prophets in the NT
Both Mt. 7:15 & Mt. 24:11 warn that there will be many false prophets (ψευδοπροφῆται) who will deceive the world. Matthew 24:24 speaks of false Christs (ψευδόχριστοι) and false prophets who perform “great signs and wonders.” Second Pet. 2:1 associates false prophets with false teachers who secretly introduce destructive heresies, even those that deny Jesus’ lordship. Similarly, 1 Jn warns of deception and commands Christians to “test the spirits to see whether they are of God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. … This is the spirit of antichrist” (1 Jn 4:1–3). Thus, false prophets have the spirit of Antichrist. The apostle Paul calls them “false apostles” (2 Cor. 11:13) and “false brothers” (Gal. 2:4).
The most notorious false prophet in the Bible is the one referenced in the Book of Revelation. In Rev. 19:20, the signs that the False prophet performs in the presence of the Antichrist may be analogous to the signs that Jesus performs in the presence of the Holy Spirit who anoints him with power (see Lk 4:18; Acts 10:38). In fact, the relationship between the False prophet and the Antichrist seems to be analogous to the relationship between the first and second person of the Trinity in which the Word is not only with God but the Word is God, meaning that the Word & God are one and the same (see Jn 1:1). Thus, the reference to the Devil, his son (the Antichrist), and the unclean spirit (personified in the figure of the False prophet) may signify an unholy trinity of three persons who nevertheless share one being (Rev. 16:13). Let’s not forget that the great dragon——“that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan”——is thrown down to the earth and takes the form of a man, as mentioned in Rev. 12:9. And just as Jesus, who is God incarnate, is called a prophet in Mt. 21:11, so the dragon, or Satan incarnate, may be dubbed the False prophet in Rev. 16:13. Matthew 7:15 warns of false prophets who come in “sheep’s clothing,” but who are “ferocious wolves.” This is echoed in Rev. 13:11 where the second Beast (False prophet) looks like a lamb but speaks like a dragon.
Conclusion
Curiously enough, it’s the False prophet who works miracles, not the Antichrist. But if the Antichrist is far more important, and if the False prophet is subordinate to the Antichrist, surely the Antichrist must have more power than him. Yet, in the Bible, the opposite seems true, which doesn’t make any sense. That’s why it seems far more plausible that they are one and the same person, just like the two witnesses and the two OT messiahs are one and the same person. So, the reference to the two beasts from the earth and the sea may be an allusion to a single individual who possesses two natures: a human & a spiritual one. Therefore, it seems far more plausible to assume that the False Prophet is the Antichrist, who is also known by many other titles, such as “the man of lawlessness,” “the son of destruction” (2 Thess. 2:3), and the "Little horn" (Daniel 7:8, 20; 8:9-12, 23-26)!
0 notes
eli-kittim · 1 month
Text
Tumblr media
The Priority of the Epistles
Eli Kittim
Principles of Interpretation
Using R.C. Sproul’s hermeneutical guidelines from his book, Knowing Scripture, I will argue that there is a chronological discrepancy in the New Testament (NT) in which the timeline of Jesus’ life in the gospels is not the same as the one mentioned in the epistles. Specifically, the epistles contradict the gospels regarding the timeline of Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection by placing it in eschatological categories. So I will argue that, based on principles of interpretation, priority must be given to the epistles. According to R.C. Sproul, exegetes must interpret the implicit by the explicit and the narrative by the didactic. In practical terms, the NT epistles and other more explicit and didactic portions of Scripture must clarify the implicit meaning and significance of the gospel literature. Accordingly, I will argue that the epistles are the primary keys to unlocking the future timeline of Christ’s only visitation. According to R.C. Sproul’s hermeneutical guidelines, the gospels must be interpreted by the epistles.
“The Historical Narrative Must be
Interpreted by the Didactic”
— R.C. Sproul
Case in point. The epistles——which are the clearest teachings of the NT——apparently contradict the gospels regarding the timeline of Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection by placing it in eschatological categories. The epistolary authors deviate from the gospel writers in their understanding of the overall importance of eschatology in the chronology of Jesus. For them, Scripture comprises revelations and “prophetic writings” (see Rom. 16:25-26; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; Rev. 22:18-19)! For example, according to the NT epistles, Jesus Christ will die “once for all” (Gk. ἅπαξ hapax) “at the end of the age” (Heb. 9:26b), a phrase which consistently refers to the end of the world (cf. Mt. 13:39-40, 49; 24:3; 28:20). Similarly, just as Hebrews 1:2 says that the physical Son speaks to humanity in the “last days,” 1 Pet. 1:20 (NJB) clearly sets forth the eschatological timing of Christ’s initial appearance “at the final point of time.” Given that the epistles are the more didactic portions of Scripture, and that the gospel narratives are not considered historical by many scholars, it would therefore seem hermeneutically legitimate to interpret the narrative by the didactic!
The Explicit & the Implicit
“The implicit is to be interpreted in light of
the explicit. Not the other way around”
— R.C. Sproul
But we have it completely backwards. For centuries, we’ve tried to interpret the explicit (epistles) in light of the implicit (gospels). And yet, it’s the didactic portions of Scripture that teach with clear and explicit statements. For example, in terms of Jesus’ appearance and death, Hebrews 9:26 (KJV) says directly and clearly, “once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” This is an explicit statement that not only shows the time of his coming (ἅπαξ ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων) but also the purpose of his appearance, namely, to sacrifice himself in order to put away sin (εἰς ἀθέτησιν ⸀ἁμαρτίας διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ). In both the Greek and English versions, the statement is very clear. Jesus’ death takes place at the consummation of the ages. We find a parallel passage in 1 Peter 1:20 (ASV):
“[Jesus] was foreknown indeed before
the foundation of the world, but was
manifested at the end of the times.”
These are straightforward, clear, and explicit teachings. To subordinate these explicit epistolary teachings of Scripture and to argue on the basis of implications drawn from the more obscure gospel narratives is a misuse of the Scripture. If we insist on the canonical context of the Bible, namely, that each book in the Old Testament (OT) & the NT is related to all the other books and is inspired by the Holy Spirit, then we have to be careful not to set these two divisions——namely, the gospels and the epistles——in opposition. The problem arises when we deduce certain things from the gospels, which then bring us into direct conflict with something that the Scripture teaches in the epistles very clearly and very plainly.
“Our implications must always be measured
by and made subordinate to what the
Scriptures explicitly teach” — R.C. Sproul
The Totality of Scripture
“Every particular passage of Scripture must
be measured and interpreted against the
whole of Scripture” — R.C. Sproul
Let’s look at the gospel narratives and the didactic literature of the epistles and compare them. The didactic literature clearly demonstrates that the NT is an Apocalypse, whereas the gospels claim to be historical eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ Life, Death, and Resurrection. The first problem is that Bible scholars don’t consider the gospels as historical accounts, but rather view them as theological documents. The second problem is that the epistles seemingly contradict the gospels with regard to the birth, death, and resurrection of Christ by placing them in eschatological categories.
Now, let’s take the principle that “every particular passage of Scripture must be measured and interpreted against the whole of Scripture” and apply it to the Messianic timeline. And let’s ask the question: according to Scripture, does the Messiah come to earth during the time of antiquity or in the end times? In fact, most of the evidence with regard to the Messianic timeline in both the OT & NT is consistent with the epistles rather than with the gospels. For example, Zephaniah 1:7-8 declares that the Lord’s sacrifice will occur during “the day of the Lord” (not in antiquity; cf. Zeph. 1:14-18). Isaiah 2:19 says that people will hide in the caves of rocks when “the Lord … arises to terrify the earth.” In other words, the Lord’s resurrection is not separate from but contemporaneous with judgement day (cf. Rev. 6:15-17)! Similarly, Daniel 12:1 puts the resurrection of the anointed prince just prior to the great tribulation. This can be proved with detailed exegesis from the Greek text. For instance, the Septuagint (LXX Daniel 12:1) says παρελεύσεται, which means to “pass away,” while the Theodotion (Daniel 12:1) has ἀναστήσεται, meaning a bodily resurrection in the end-times. In the following verse (Daniel 12:2), the plural form of the exact same word (ἀναστήσονται) is used to describe the general resurrection of the dead! In other words, if the exact same word means resurrection in Daniel 12:2, then it must also necessarily mean resurrection in Daniel 12:1! Acts 3:20-21 similarly says that Christ will not be sent to earth until the consummation of the ages. Even Luke 17:30 claims that the Son of man has not yet been revealed! In fact, 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 tells us explicitly that Christ will be resurrected in the end-times (an idea also entertained by James Dunn):
“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all
will be made alive. But each in his own
order: Christ the first fruits, after that those
who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes
the end.”
What is more, Revelation 12:5 makes it clear that the messiah is born in the end times as a contemporary of the last world empire, which is depicted as a seven-headed dragon with ten horns (cf. Rev. 17:9-14). In fact, chapter 12 & verse 5 describes the birth of the messiah, & the immediate next verse talks about the great tribulation. Likewise, Galatians 4:4 says that Jesus will be born during the consummation of the ages, expressed by the apocalyptic phrase τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, which is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world! And Hebrews 9:26 (KJV) says EXPLICITLY——categorically and unequivocally——that Jesus will die for the sins of mankind “once in the end of the world” (ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων)! Rev 19:10 also informs us that the TESTIMONY to Jesus is prophetic (not historical). Read Acts 10:40-41 where we are told that Jesus’ resurrection was based on visions because it was only visible “to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God.” First Peter 1:10-11 also says that the NT prophets “predicted the sufferings of the Messiah” in advance (cf. Isa 46:10)!
0 notes
eli-kittim · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
Eli Kittim on Instagram
Eli Kittim’s Unique Interpretation of Jesus
Eli Kittim’s eschatology is a view in biblical studies that interprets the story of Jesus in exclusively eschatological terms. This unique approach was developed by Eli of Kittim, especially in his 2013 work, The Little Book of Revelation. Kittim doesn’t consider Jesus' life as something that happened in history but rather as something that will occur in the last days as a fulfillment of bible prophecy. It involves a new paradigm shift! Kittim holds to an exclusive futuristic eschatology in which the story of Jesus (his birth, death, and resurrection) takes place once and for all in the end-times (see Heb. 9:26b; 1 Pet. 1:20). Kittim’s eschatology provides a solution to the historical problems associated with the historical Jesus.
0 notes
eli-kittim · 3 months
Text
Eli Kittim - The Little Book of Revelation: The First Coming of Jesus at the End of Days
伊莱·基蒂姆 启示录小书:耶稣在末日的第一次降临
एली किट्टिम - रहस्योद्घाटन की छोटी पुस्तक: दिनों के अंत में यीशु का पहला आगमन
Эли Киттим - Маленькая книга Откровения: Первое пришествие Иисуса в конце дней
‎אלי כטים - ספר ההתגלות הקטן: ביאתו הראשונה של ישוע באחרית הימים
إيلي كيتيم كتاب الرؤيا الصغير: المجيء الأول ليسوع في نهاية الأيام
Ελι Κιττίμ - Το Μικρό Βιβλίο της Αποκάλυψης: Η Πρώτη Παρουσία του Ιησού στο τέλος των Ημερών
Tumblr media
1 note · View note
eli-kittim · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
Eli of Kittim Author Page on Facebook
0 notes
eli-kittim · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media
0 notes