eli-kittim - Eli of Kittim
Eli of Kittim

Author of “The Little Book of Revelation.” Get your copy now!!https://www.xlibris.com/en/bookstore/bookdetails/597424-the-little-book-of-revelation

447 posts

A Retelling Of The Jesus Story Http://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Revelation-First-Coming/dp/1479747068/ref=la_B00FWAVSMC_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1414502907&sr=1-1

A Retelling Of The Jesus Story Http://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Revelation-First-Coming/dp/1479747068/ref=la_B00FWAVSMC_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1414502907&sr=1-1

A Retelling of the Jesus Story http://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Revelation-First-Coming/dp/1479747068/ref=la_B00FWAVSMC_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1414502907&sr=1-1

  • moshing-for-our-maker
    moshing-for-our-maker liked this · 10 years ago

More Posts from Eli-kittim

10 years ago

The White Horse: Christ or Antichrist?

By Biblical Researcher Eli of Kittim

The current view holds that the first horseman of the Apocalypse represents the Antichrist (the assumption is as follows: if Christ already came, then the white horse must be referring to the Antichrist). Here's why the mainstream view is wrong:

(1) There are no counterfeit signs found anywhere in the Bible.

So why should this be a precedent? That is, why would a white horse (a symbol of purity and righteousness) represent something as black as hell? Is the Deity deceiving us? Is it possible that white is really black or that good is really evil in the Bible? The mainstream view would have to reservedly admit that it's possible, only because that is the logical conclusion of a counterfeit sign found in scripture. I vehemently disagree. The white symbol of purity is consistent throughout the Bible. There are no counterfeit signs in scripture. Hence the white horse does not represent the antichrist: it symbolizes Christ!

Here is an excerpt from my book, The Little Book of Revelation: The First Coming of Jesus at the End of Days:

//"Immediately I saw a white horse appear, and its rider was holding a bow; he was given a victor’s crown and he went away, to go from victory to victory" (Rev. 6:2, NJB).

The biblical term victory is intimately associated with Jesus Christ’s resurrection from the dead, which ultimately results in the conquering of death itself (1 Cor. 15:54, 57), while the metaphor of the bow represents God’s covenant with the human race (see the Septuagint’s translation of Gen. 9.13, which uses the exact same Greek word for “rainbow” that’s used in Rev. 6.2, namely, “toxon”)! The background to the latter symbol can be found in the writings of the Old Testament. In the wake of the great flood, the deity declares to Noah, the apparent savior of the human species:

‘I set My bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth’ (Gen. 9:13).

The New King James version of the Bible translates the word bow as "rainbow" (Gen. 9:13). The image of the rainbow is closely associated with the biblical story of Joseph, a savior type figure who wore “a coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3; cf. 49:22-24, KJ). For all intents and purposes, all these stories of God’s covenant with the world share many common traits and culminate in the apocalyptic Messiah who is crowned with a rainbow (bow) upon his head:

"And I saw another strong angel coming down out of heaven, clothed with a cloud; and the rainbow was upon his head, and his face was like the sun, and his feet like pillars of fire; and he had in his hand a little book which was open" (Rev. 10:1-2).

Therefore, the first horseman of the Apocalypse (6:2), who is in possession of a bow (the covenant), is evidently none other than Christ himself (cf. Rev. 14:14). Irenaeus, a second century theologian, held the same view, namely, that the first rider of the white horse who is depicted as a peacemaker represents Jesus Christ (Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Rev. ed. [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997], p. 141). Here is another passage that introduces the prelude to this same event; it represents a deeply unsettling episode in world history:

"And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war. … And He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood; and His name is called The Word of God" (Rev. 19:11-13).

The above phrase – “and behold, a white horse” – is identical to the one used in the book of Revelation chapter 6 and verse 2 concerning the first horseman of the Apocalypse. Just as the latter horseman conquered death, the former horseman (from Rev. 19:11-13) is “dipped in blood,” as both scenarios imply that he has been slain. Essentially, Revelation 6:2 and Revelation 19:11 appear to be two sides of the same coin. The composite biblical message indicates that Christ will be the first person to be revealed in the final days of the coming apocalypse. In point of fact, Revelation 19:11 provides more in-depth details into the specifics of Revelation 6:2.//

(2) Note that the white horseman is WITHOUT arrows (signifying peace, not war).

(3) Revelation 6:8—in discussing the upcoming, end times wars and famines—MAKES NO MENTION of the white horse at all, but begins with the second horse, the Red Horse:

"And they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by wild beasts of the earth." (Rev. 6:8, ESV).

Notice that the white horse is never mentioned. The war commences with the second horse (The Red Horse, which I believe represents the Antichrist):

"And they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword [2nd horse/red horse: 'and a great sword was given to him' Rev. 6:4] and with famine [3rd horse/black horse] and with pestilence [4th horse/ashen horse] and by wild beasts of the earth."

This would strongly suggest that the white horse is NOT the Antichrist, but Jesus Christ, especially in view of Revelation 12:1-5 as well as a multitude of different verses and passages thus presented! This constitutes further proof that Jesus is the first person to be revealed in the last days, who commences the sequence of end time events...


Tags :
9 years ago

Realized Eschatology versus Future Eschatology

By Author Eli of Kittim

Realized eschatology is a term in Christian theology used to describe the belief that the end times (or latter days) have already happened during the ministry of Jesus. According to this position, all end-time events have already been “realized” (i.e., fulfilled ), including the resurrection of the dead, and the second coming of Jesus.

This view is the culmination of poor methodological considerations, misapplication of proper exegetical methods (i.e. literary context /detailed exegesis), and a confusion of terms and context. The under-mentioned examples typify this confusion:

Example A) “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18).

Example B) “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…” (Hebrews 1:1-2).

Here, without a proper understanding of context, we are led to believe that John is referring to the “last days” as occurring in or around the 1st century CE. These types of verses have misled many to follow Preterism, a doctrine which holds that biblical prophecies represent incidents that have already been fulfilled at the close of the first century. Unfortunately, the same type of misappropriation of scripture has given birth to “realized eschatology.”

Notice that in Example A, John states that “it is the last hour.” The context implies that there are two possibilities within which this phrase can make scriptural sense. Either John is literally referring to the 1st century as being the last or final hour of mankind (which would include the coming of the Antichrist, since John mentions him), or the overall context of this and other texts is, strictly speaking, an eschatological one in which all these events take place in the future, and not during John’s lifetime.

As I have shown in earlier works, scriptural tenses that are set in the past, present and future do not necessarily correspond to past, present or future history respectively. What is more, logic tells us that “the final point of time” represents the end of the world. Yet there are future events that are clearly described in the past tense. For example, “He [Christ] … was revealed at the final point of time” (1 Pet. 1:20, NJB, emphasis added). In a passage that deals exclusively with the great tribulation of the end times, we find another future event that is described in the past tense; it reads: “From the tribe of Judah, twelve thousand had been sealed” (Rev. 7:5, emphasis added). Isaiah 53 is a perfect example because we can demonstrate that Isaiah was composing a prophecy, at the time he penned this text, which was saturated with past tenses.

In Example B, we face a similar dilemma. The author of Hebrews combines the idiomatic phrase “last days” with the present tense “these,” which implies several things:

1) The phrase “in these last days” gives us the impression that the “last days” may have started or occurred during the author’s lifetime.

2) It implies that Jesus not only appeared, but he appeared specifically “in these last days.”

3) The phrase “in these last days” might simply be an allusion to the days just mentioned. It’s like saying, concerning the days in question, or with regard to the days that we are describing, rather than a reference to the present time.

So, at first sight, there seems to be some basis (biblical support) for a realized-eschatology interpretation. However, upon further scrutiny, we find many outright logical fallacies (a logical fallacy is, roughly speaking, an error of reasoning) that cannot possibly be true. For example, how can the last days of the world occur in the 1st century CE if nineteen plus centuries have since come and gone? It would be a contradiction in terms!

Moreover, these positions flatly contradict not only the broad scriptural context of the term “last days” and its cognates (i.e., “the time of the end” Dan. 12:4), but also certain definite future events, such as the “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21; cf. Daniel 12:1-2) and the coming of the “lawless one” (2 Thess. 2:3-4; cf. Rev. 13), which clearly have yet to occur. Therefore, the so-called “realized” eschatological interpretations involve logical fallacies, blatant misappropriation of future events, methodological errors, misapplication of proper exegetical methods, and misinterpretation of tenses with regard to proper eschatological context.

Contradiction notwithstanding, many have endorsed these false teachings. Daniel 12 and Matthew 24 are two examples that demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that “the time of the end” is radically different than what these interpreters make it out to be, namely, a first-century occurrence. These views (regarding the last days as eschatological events that occurred in the 1st century CE) display, for lack of a better term, an eccentric doctrine. They are patently ridiculous!

The same holds true in the gospel of John. Jesus says:

“Truly, Truly, I say to you, the hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the son of God; and those who hear will live” (John 5:25).

The phrase “and now is” implies that this particular time period is happening now. However, notice a clear distinction between the hour that is here and “the hour that is coming” when the dead will rise again (in the under mentioned verse). These two time periods are clearly not identical because the events to which the latter prophecy points have yet to happen:

“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in their graves will hear his voice, and come forth, … those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).

The context of John 5:25 ff. is ultimately based on future history (i.e., history written in advance), but the author reinterprets it through a theology. On what basis am I making these claims? Since I concluded that “realized eschatology” is seemingly erroneous, we now have to consider its opposite, namely, the view that the last days are really referring to literal future events, and not to the time of Antiquity.

One illustration of this view is in the context in which Jesus’ earthly appearance is contemporaneous with Judgment Day. Jesus uses the present tense “now” to indicate that his manifestation on earth is for the purpose of Judgment, and the overthrow of Satan:

“Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31).

Jesus’ use of the word “now,” in connection with the removal of Satan and Judgment, would indicate that his earthly appearance (as described in the gospels) is a reference to a future event, one that could not have possibly happened in Antiquity.

Another example shows that Christ’s generation (as described in the gospels) is the last generation on earth. During his eschatological discourse, Christ uses the words “this generation” to refer to his audience. He says,

“Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” (Matthew 24:34).

In the following verse, Jesus uses the words “some who are standing here” to signify his audience. Interestingly enough, Jesus implies that his audience (or generation) is the one related to the end times. The idea that Jesus’ audience (as described in the gospels) represents the last generation on earth that would see Jesus coming in the clouds is furnished in the gospel of Matthew:

“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28).

The notion that some of Jesus’ followers would not die before they saw him coming in glory cannot be attributed to the 1st century CE. It can only be ascribed to a future event, since Jesus has yet to come in his glory! These verses would strongly suggest that the account of Jesus (as described in the gospels) is really in the context of a future event rather than one that occurred in the 1st century of the Common Era.

In conclusion, scriptural tenses that are set in the past, present and future do not necessarily correspond to past, present or future history respectively. What is more, both scripture and logic tell us that “the final point of time” represents the end of the world, and therefore this “end time” period could not have possibly happened during the 1st century CE.

There are also gospel materials, which indicate not only that Jesus’ audience represents the last generation on earth, but that Jesus’ manifestation on earth signifies the immediate removal of Satan and the commencement of Judgment. Add to this material the original Greek texts—with multiple references to Jesus appearing “once at the consummation of the ages” (Heb. 9:26; cf. Luke 17:30; Heb. 1:1-2; 1 Pet. 1:5, 20; Rev. 12:1-5) or at the end of human history—and the eschatological context of the “last days” finally comes into view as a future reference!

Realized Eschatology Versus Future Eschatology

Tags :
9 years ago

Who Are the Twenty-Four Elders of Revelation Chapter 4?

By Author Eli Kittim

“Around the throne were twenty-four thrones; and upon the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white garments, and golden crowns on their heads.” —Revelation 4:4

The book of Revelation does not disclose the identity of the twenty-four elders. However, based on the descriptions given, and the relationship of this passage to other parts of the Bible, we can make certain valid inferences. The illustrations depicting them as sitting on thrones signify that they are reigning with Christ. John MacArthur, a noted theologian and author, writes:

“Nowhere in Scripture do angels sit on thrones, nor are they pictured ruling or reigning. Their role is to serve as ‘ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation’ (Heb. 1:14; cf. Mat. 18:10).”—John MacArthur, Revelation 1-11: The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999).

Moreover, The Greek word for “elders” is “Presviterous,” from where we get the English word “Presbyters,” meaning elders or ministers of the Church. Interestingly enough, the same word used in Revelation 4:4 for elder is also used in connection with the visible church on earth (otherwise known as the “body of Christ”) in 1 Peter 5:1. In this regard, Paul writes, “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?” (1 Cor. 6:2). According to the gospel of Luke, it is human beings that will rule and reign with Christ (22:30).

Furthermore, the twenty-four elders are clothed in white raiment. Their white garments would also be more consistent with heavenly saints who were once men—and who were saved and cleansed by the blood of the Lamb—than with angelic beings. The color white always signifies the holiness and purity of God (and that’s why I also maintain that the white horse of Revelation 6:2 can only signify Christ; more on that later). For instance, Revelation 6:11 describes the tribulation saints in this way:

“And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also.”

Similarly, Revelation 3:18 says, “I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness.”

It is of immense importance to understand the types of crowns these twenty-four elders wear because this theme will ultimately help us uncover important clues about the mysterious identity of the white horse in Revelation 6:2 (the so-called first horseman of the Apocalypse)! In the original Greek text, the twenty-four elders are said to wear golden “stephanous” crowns (Rev. 4:10). A “stephanos” crown is associated with the glory of God, and “stephanos” is the Greek word used for crown in 1 Thessalonians:

“For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes?” (1 Thess. 2:19).

In fact, a “stephanos” crown is explicitly defined as representing “Righteousness,” since that is the Greek word used for crown in 2 Timothy 4:8:

“Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”

In 1 Peter 5:4 the Greek word for crown—namely, “stephanon,”—represents “the unfading crown of glory”: “And when the Chief Shepherd appears [Christ], you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” What is more, the Greek term “stephanos” is used to represent a kingly or royal crown in connection with Christ’s passion: “And they clothed him [Christ] with purple, and platted a crown [“stephanon”] of thorns, and put it about his head” (Mark 15:17; cf. John 19:2). So, Christ is given a royal “stephanon” crown (which he also wears in Rev. 14:14) that will become a metaphor for his passion, death, and resurrection! The term “stephanos” means crown or crowned in Greek. More precisely, it is “a victor’s wreath.” In other words, the word “stephanos” signifies a victor’s crown, and is intimately associated with the Greek word “niki” (meaning “victory”), which is the Greek word used in connection with Christ’s victory over death in 1 Corinthians 15:54, 57.

The reason this study is so important is that the same Greek terms used in the New Testament to define the crowns of God’s righteousness, God’s glory, and Christ’s victory over death are the exact same terms used in describing the first horseman of the Apocalypse, the white horse! By comparison, the white horseman of Revelation 6:2 also wears a “stephanos” crown: “he was given a victor’s crown and he went away, to go from victory to victory.” In Greek it reads:

“Kai edothi auto stephanos kai exilthen nikon kai ina nikisi.”

The words “nikon” and “nikisi” are action verbs of the noun “niki,” which means “victory.” Some Bible versions mistranslate the words “nikon” and “nikisi” with the words “conquering and to conquer.”

However, the Greek word for conquest is “κατάκτηση,” and it means “the subjugation and assumption of control of a place or people by use of military force,” whereas “victory” means defeating an opponent, or winning a game, race, or other competition. Though they may appear to be similar, the words conquest and victory have completely different meanings. By transcribing the Greek “Nikon” and “Nikisi” (which mean “Victory”) with the English words “Conquering” and “Conquer” (which mean to subjugate people via military force) some scholars seem to insinuate a malevolent figure because they are essentially mistranslating the Victorious Christ into the Conquering Antichrist (which explains why many scholars identify this figure as the Antichrist).

However, there are also accurate translations of Revelation 6:2 that portray this white horseman as victorious rather than one who is bent on conquest. For instance, The New Jerusalem Bible reads: “and he went away, to go from victory to victory” (suggesting from glory to glory; cf. Common English Bible). The New International Reader’s Version says “He rode out like a hero on his way to victory.” Similarly, the Jubilee Bible 2000 says that “he went forth victorious, that he might overcome,” terms that are intimately associated with the righteous, and especially with Jesus Christ. Similarly, Irenaeus, an early church father, held that the first rider of the white horse who is depicted as a peacemaker represents Jesus Christ. And, let us not forget that Revelation 19:11 uses the same exact terminology and symbolic imagery as in Rev. 6:2 to tell us that this is in fact Jesus.

Let us now return to the twenty-four elders. The problem of identifying these figures has to do with how the book of Revelation is composed, which is to say, whether the events it alludes to are written in chronological order or not. There is ample evidence that the end time events are mentioned in detail chronologically, reaching a crescendo towards the end of the book, but there are also overlapping themes that serve the purpose of giving the reader the big picture, as it were, and this seems to be a source of great confusion. Some commentators claim that the twenty-four elders cannot represent the raptured church because they are mentioned prior to the great tribulation, and also because they are depicted as anticipating these coming events. This is partly true. Apparently, the twenty-four elders are mentioned chronologically before the chapters that allude to the rapture, and the death and ascension of Christ (Ch. 5), and prior to Ch. 6 that references the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.

However, Chapters 2 and 3 give us the overall picture (big picture) concerning the church’s tribulation, and beginning with chapter 6 we get more specific details from start to finish. The same holds true for the Antichrist in Revelation 19 and 20. The Satanic figure that is loosed in Revelation chapter 20 is the same Antichrist that died in the previous chapter; but, here, the story is described in more detail. So, although there appears to be a chronological order of events in the book of Revelation, there are also overlapping themes that are played out. Thus, we have the big picture, on the one hand, and details on the other. So then, since Chapters 2 and 3 reference the great tribulation (2:9), and since authority and rule (2:26-27) and white garments (3:4-5) are promised therein to those who overcome, it is more than likely that the twenty-four elders represent the tribulation saints (cf. Luke 22:30). In fact, Jesus says emphatically:

“He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne” —Rev. 3:21

Elsewhere, John the Revelator has a vision:

“Then I saw thrones, and sitting on them were those to whom authority to act as judges and to pass sentence was entrusted” (Rev. 20:4).

In the gospels, Jesus said the apostles would judge the twelve tribes “in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory” (Mat. 19:28). Another clue comes from an “elder” who explains to John the identity of those coming out of the Great Tribulation (Rev. 7:13-14). Therefore, these elders seemingly represent the overcomers of Revelation 2 and 3.

In many ways, Revelation 4 is a throwback to Daniel 7. According to his vision of the end times, Daniel reports that “thrones were set up,” and that “the Ancient of Days took His seat” (Dan. 7:9) in order to pass judgment “in favor of the saints” when “the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom” (Dan. 7:22). The (tribulation) saints will be given into the hands of the beast (Antichrist) for “a time and times and half a time” (Dan. 7:25), but the court will convene and remove “his dominion … forever” (Dan. 7:26).

Why Are There Twenty-Four Elders in Revelation Chapter 4?

The number 24 per se may contain a secret code and perhaps allude to a cryptic date or season when the Great Tribulation will commence, but anything more than that is pure conjecture. Biblically speaking, the figure 24 may have been taken from 1 Chr. 24:3-6, in which David divided the Tribe of Levi into 24 courses (twenty-four courses of Levitical priests rotating to minister in the Tabernacle). Since the tribulation saints represent a priestly kingdom, it would mean that they are probably represented by the twenty-four elders. This last point offers yet another clue to the fact that the twenty-four elders represent men and not angels.

Another view holds that the number of the elders represent the twelve tribes of Israel—as written on the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:12)—and “the twelve apostles of the Lamb”—as written on the twelve foundations of the New City (Rev. 21:14). Since we’re discussing tribulation saints, it seems like a proleptic interpretation to suggest that twelve of the elders represent Old Testament saints, and the other twelve New Testament saints. A more realistic interpretation is to ascribe these values to Jews and Gentiles alike. Thus, twelve of the elders could represent tribulation saints from the 12 tribes of Israel (believers in Christ), and the other twelve the remainder of the tribulation saints. In other words, the twenty-four elders may be composed of all the tribulation saints, which would include both “Israel” and the “church.” Therefore, the twenty-four elders of Revelation Chapter 4 seemingly represent a remnant of both Jews and Gentiles (the redeemed tribulation saints) who meet in council before the throne of God in preparation for the coming judgment of the world!


Tags :
10 years ago

Misinterpreting the Bible: Borrowed Stories, Anachronistic Beliefs, and Misleading Past Tenses

By Author Eli of Kittim

Just as the gospel stories are borrowed, to a large extent, from the Jewish Bible in order to show that Jesus is the messianic fulfillment of Hebrew Scripture, the idea of Jesus and the 12 apostles equally comes from the Old Testament:

“Kαι ανακαλεσαμενος Ιησους [Jesus] δωδεκα ανδρας των ενδοξων απο των υιων ισραηλ ενα αφ’ εκαστης φυλης.” (Joshua 4:4, Septuagint).

Translation: “And Jesus [Ιησους] called twelve men, whom he had chosen out of the children of Israel, one out of every tribe.”

It is the same with the slaughter of the innocents. This is a reworking of the Exodus story in an effort to show that Jesus is the new Moses. Just as the Pharaoh attempts to kill the Israelite children—but Moses escapes—so Herod tries to kill all the children of Bethlehem—but Jesus escapes!

“The quest for the historical Jesus has produced little agreement on the historical reliability of the Gospels and on how closely the biblical Jesus reflects the historical Jesus.” (Powell, Mark A. Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee. 1998. Westminster: John Knox Press).

Bible prophecy Scholars know that what is referenced in the following passage concerns future events, not past history. Moreover, it is well-known that the phrase, “In that day,” which is repeated throughout, refers to the last days. But here’s an important and definitive contradiction between the Jesus of antiquity (our current view) and the “pierced” Jesus of the end times who is looked upon by those who pierce him. How could the same people who pierced Christ 2,000 years ago look at him “In that [future] day”? Unless the piercing of Jesus is a future event, it does not make any sense, scriptural or otherwise, for it creates a bizarre case of anachronism:

“When they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it. In that day,” says the Lord, “I will strike every horse with confusion, and its rider with madness; I will open My eyes on the house of Judah, and will strike every horse of the peoples with blindness. … they shall devour all the surrounding peoples on the right hand and on the left, but Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place—Jerusalem…. In that day the Lord will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; the one who is feeble among them in that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the Angel of the Lord before them. It shall be in that day that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. “And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zechariah 12:2–10).

This constitutes further evidence that a) Jesus is “pierced” AFTER the Jews return to their homeland (“In that day … Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place—Jerusalem”), and b) that this “piercing” occurs sometime in the future (“In that day … they will look on Me whom they pierced”)—just as Daniel states in Chapter 9 verses 24 to 26, namely, that the “anointed one” (messiah) will die after the restoration of Jerusalem (which occurred in 1967).

But here’s the game changer. Scholars claim that past tenses imply past history. Thus, for example, when we read 1 Corinthians 15:3, we must assume Paul is referring to the past, not the future:

“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.”

Using the same criteria of past tenses, let us now read another passage to determine whether it refers to prophecy (future), or history:

“Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.” (Isaiah 53:1-9).

If we didn’t know better, we would swear that this passage refers to past history, and that Isaiah is recounting an event which occurred before his time. For his verses are saturated with past tenses. But, surprise, surprise… despite all of the past tenses, it’s a prophecy that Isaiah is writing about! This passage teaches us that a) past tenses in the Bible do not necessarily reflect past history, and that b) prophecies themselves could equally be set in the past.

P.S. Also, notice that, just as in Zechariah 12:10, Isaiah 53:5 describes the Messiah as being “pierced” (not crucified)!


Tags :