While I typically stay out of end times conjecture, I find this guy's stuff pretty interesting.
http://stevenmcollins.com/EZEKIEL_38-39_article.pdf
http://stevenmcollins.com/EZEKIEL_38-39_article.pdf
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
End times?
- Thread starter steve
- Start date
Read the article, and found it well worth the time. We only found a few minor things we see differently.
The author has Ezekiel's dry bones prophesy being fulfilled by a literal resurrection of Israelites, at the beginning of the millennium, while we see that prophesy as a continuation of the previous prophesy for several reasons. The Israelites in the prophesy say "our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts" this is talking about the house of Israel, that was exiled. As you read on you get to the verse where God tells them "I shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land..." This is much like the previous prophesy in chapter 36, and it is a fine example of prophetic speech, very descriptive, but nothing about this indicates it will be a literal resurrection, at the end of the millennium. It actually goes along with Jer. 31:31 in that changes to the hearts and an indwelling of God's spirit are marks of the new covenant that was to be with both houses of Israel. For another example of this type of language speaking of the spiritual separation from God see Romans 11:15 where Paul likens the receiving of the cast off, to life from the dead.
Besides having the two houses separated until the beginning of the millennium, the author also believes that King David will be resurrected to rule over the people. David was told he would not lack an heir to sit on the throne till Shiloh be come, but the Scriptures are clear that it is Christ's kingdom that is to be perpetual, at least until He gives the kingdom back to His Father. Since the new covenant was made with both houses, and believers of any tribe or no tribe have been called Christians since Antioch, we see the two houses reunited since the time of Christ, in the new covenant that Yeshua Messiah/Jesus Christ is mediator of. Hosea 1:10 said that in the place that it was said to them you are not my people it would be said to them Ye are the sons of the living God. v11 then shall the children of Judah and the Children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head... This indicated unity at the time they put on Christ and came into the new covenant. Another thing is John 10:16 where Jesus spoke of other sheep that were not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.
The author also has Gog and Magog attacking other nations, and while I guess it's possible that Gog and Magog may do so, the USA is the one described, and while the author sees the phrase without bars or gates to be figurative speech for letting down defenses, it is also very literal here in this country.
It was refreshing to see someone affirm that Israel did not vanish off the world stage, but rather that they are the multiplied and blessed posterity that went into captivity for transgressions of His law. The curses are upon us, and are a sign and wonder that identify us as Israel....forever. (see Duet 28:46)
Of course believing the two houses are already united in the new covenant, we see the non messianic Jews in a different light, then most. The Jewish Encyclopedia's entry on Edom/Edomite sheds some light on why some called Jews hated him, and why Jesus told some plainly they were NOT his sheep. There is only one verse I am aware of that indicates that some Judahites were left out of the new covenant until end times, and it is Micah 5:1-3
Jesus said to judge by fruits, and Paul said that IF ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:29) The scriptures are plain that if you don't have the son, you don't have the Father either. Of course those rejecting Jesus need Him, but none can come to the Father unless the Father draws them....and Jesus telling some His word had no place in them, might indicate they had other prophesies to fulfill.
All in all, it was an interesting read, and one I hope has awakened some in the last 12 years to a more correct view of who is who, and where that great battle will be happening. It is exciting times we live in. Those who make it through will get to see His kingdom established. That is something believers for thousands of years have looked forward to.
Another thing we see differently is that the author wants to identify the USA as Manasseh, while we believe the USA is regathered Israel, as we have immigrants from every nation that Israel had migrated into. One of my favorite verses is the one that says that to the daughter of Zion (we believe that is this nation) will come the first dominion. Micah 4:8-10 I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.
The author has Ezekiel's dry bones prophesy being fulfilled by a literal resurrection of Israelites, at the beginning of the millennium, while we see that prophesy as a continuation of the previous prophesy for several reasons. The Israelites in the prophesy say "our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts" this is talking about the house of Israel, that was exiled. As you read on you get to the verse where God tells them "I shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land..." This is much like the previous prophesy in chapter 36, and it is a fine example of prophetic speech, very descriptive, but nothing about this indicates it will be a literal resurrection, at the end of the millennium. It actually goes along with Jer. 31:31 in that changes to the hearts and an indwelling of God's spirit are marks of the new covenant that was to be with both houses of Israel. For another example of this type of language speaking of the spiritual separation from God see Romans 11:15 where Paul likens the receiving of the cast off, to life from the dead.
Besides having the two houses separated until the beginning of the millennium, the author also believes that King David will be resurrected to rule over the people. David was told he would not lack an heir to sit on the throne till Shiloh be come, but the Scriptures are clear that it is Christ's kingdom that is to be perpetual, at least until He gives the kingdom back to His Father. Since the new covenant was made with both houses, and believers of any tribe or no tribe have been called Christians since Antioch, we see the two houses reunited since the time of Christ, in the new covenant that Yeshua Messiah/Jesus Christ is mediator of. Hosea 1:10 said that in the place that it was said to them you are not my people it would be said to them Ye are the sons of the living God. v11 then shall the children of Judah and the Children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head... This indicated unity at the time they put on Christ and came into the new covenant. Another thing is John 10:16 where Jesus spoke of other sheep that were not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.
The author also has Gog and Magog attacking other nations, and while I guess it's possible that Gog and Magog may do so, the USA is the one described, and while the author sees the phrase without bars or gates to be figurative speech for letting down defenses, it is also very literal here in this country.
It was refreshing to see someone affirm that Israel did not vanish off the world stage, but rather that they are the multiplied and blessed posterity that went into captivity for transgressions of His law. The curses are upon us, and are a sign and wonder that identify us as Israel....forever. (see Duet 28:46)
Of course believing the two houses are already united in the new covenant, we see the non messianic Jews in a different light, then most. The Jewish Encyclopedia's entry on Edom/Edomite sheds some light on why some called Jews hated him, and why Jesus told some plainly they were NOT his sheep. There is only one verse I am aware of that indicates that some Judahites were left out of the new covenant until end times, and it is Micah 5:1-3
Jesus said to judge by fruits, and Paul said that IF ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:29) The scriptures are plain that if you don't have the son, you don't have the Father either. Of course those rejecting Jesus need Him, but none can come to the Father unless the Father draws them....and Jesus telling some His word had no place in them, might indicate they had other prophesies to fulfill.
All in all, it was an interesting read, and one I hope has awakened some in the last 12 years to a more correct view of who is who, and where that great battle will be happening. It is exciting times we live in. Those who make it through will get to see His kingdom established. That is something believers for thousands of years have looked forward to.
Another thing we see differently is that the author wants to identify the USA as Manasseh, while we believe the USA is regathered Israel, as we have immigrants from every nation that Israel had migrated into. One of my favorite verses is the one that says that to the daughter of Zion (we believe that is this nation) will come the first dominion. Micah 4:8-10 I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.
Last edited:
So are you some version of Hebrew Israelite Jolene?
Do I think that somewhere in my ancestors there are literal descendants of Jacob/Israel? For sure.
I really believe that the number of Israelites are beyond being counted, as they were sown throughout the world by God, and have intermarried with other believers, and non believers for 2000 years.
If the household of Israel could go from less then 100 to a few million in 430 years, what do you think a few thousand of Judeans would multiply to in 2000 years? And that wouldn't be counting the ten tribes, or other descendants that left Egypt before the exodus.
I think this is why YHWH said in Isaiah that their descendants would inherit the nations. Because intermarriage makes more Israelites, not less.
What I don't understand is why so many Christians have no problem with the concept of being adopted gentiles, but object in so many ways to the thought of being literal children of the promise.
"Father Abraham had many sons, many sons had father Abraham, I am one of them, and you are too, so lets all say hooray." I know people who sing this, but believe that Israel was assimilated.
The author of that article linked above is very right about the tremendous amount of material supporting where Israel went. There is a ton of it out there.
It's an interesting video, however, he makes the same assumption that many have over the centuries because of a Protestant bias against the RCC.
IMO, when you examine the Scriptural proof available, the identification of the Pope as the false prophet is very possible but the assertion that Rome is the Mystery Babylon of Revelations is unsupportable within the text aside from the coincidence of the 7 hills. (Which works with other locations as well)
Will the Pope work hand in hand with the Antichrist? Sure. Is he the AC? I'm pretty sure he's not. I'm certain he and the RCC do (and will) play a big role but I've yet to see any conclusive proof to back it up Scripturally or to tie it to Mystery Babylon. Usually, someone takes a significant current event, tries to make it somehow match Scripture, and then plays off of said bias for proof.
Check the chapter out. The woman and the city is all about trade, not religion. Many of you know I'm not a big fan of the RCC. I had been taught this perspective growing up. Imagine my surprise to find that the text doesnt support the bias.
P.S. There's an interesting correlation with this same woman sealed in an ephah (symbol of trade) being carried to Shinar (Babylon) and having a "house" built and set upon a base in Zechariah 5.
Peace and love and all the fuzzy stuff!
IMO, when you examine the Scriptural proof available, the identification of the Pope as the false prophet is very possible but the assertion that Rome is the Mystery Babylon of Revelations is unsupportable within the text aside from the coincidence of the 7 hills. (Which works with other locations as well)
Will the Pope work hand in hand with the Antichrist? Sure. Is he the AC? I'm pretty sure he's not. I'm certain he and the RCC do (and will) play a big role but I've yet to see any conclusive proof to back it up Scripturally or to tie it to Mystery Babylon. Usually, someone takes a significant current event, tries to make it somehow match Scripture, and then plays off of said bias for proof.
Check the chapter out. The woman and the city is all about trade, not religion. Many of you know I'm not a big fan of the RCC. I had been taught this perspective growing up. Imagine my surprise to find that the text doesnt support the bias.
P.S. There's an interesting correlation with this same woman sealed in an ephah (symbol of trade) being carried to Shinar (Babylon) and having a "house" built and set upon a base in Zechariah 5.
Peace and love and all the fuzzy stuff!
ב"ה
**** I'm answering this 1 comment you made above ****
There are several places in the the bible where we are told that Israelis who do not keep a certain commandment will be "yiqaret" (cut off) from his people. It's being disinherited.
So if someone has say a geat-grandparent who was a Jew, and that great-grandparent intermarried, the only way to not be "cut off" from Israel is if they and all the descendants kept those commands which result in being disinherited.
Now sure, that person would still be a physical "descendant" of Abraham but so are the Ishmaelites and the Ishmaelites are not children of the promise.
So we see then that the "Jew gene" is not "dominant" in that a person can not be 1/1000th Israelite and 999/1000th Gentile and tadah! It's Israel! I think G-d designed the whole "cut off" commands this way so that there would not be Gentile Christians claiming the physical land of Israel is theirs. Imagine that? If we had to fight the Arabs and the Gentile Christians for the land today?
The only danger are those who try to make hundreds of millions of Israelis and then scoff at actual Israel as somehow being "not Israel". Well that's just a trick of the devil we've seen many times by many other names in the past. When it's not enough to reach for Jewish identity for oneself, but the actual Jews to whom G-d has restored the land in this generation, must somehow be de-legitimized, that's when motives need to be checked as well as the source of those motives...
So if you want to claim that most Christians, or most Americans must have some drop of Jewish blood somewhere, before you seek theological ramifications to that, consider the "cut-off" commands and that Moses was serious as a heart attack when he scratched those down. Be careful also not to try to disinherit those who are not "cut off". I've seen it too often...
Last edited:
Spooky.
I'm pretty much slow to accept end times stuff, but I will say that this pope has been extra-spooky.
interesting take on the digital footprint push from the Vatican in that video.
Combine that with Pope Francis saying the Quran is equal to the bible and yikes...
Uh ... isn't the actual nation state called "Israel", in the land promised by our forefathers , located in the middle East "regathered Israel"???
You know who, besides USA also has "immigrants from every nation where Jews lived"?
The country called "Israel" and it's in the right place geographically for regathering.
(color me confused). America seems kinda of far away
עם ישראל חי! עוד אבינו חי
Last edited:
I do believe we are living in Interesting times, in the Chinese sense of the word.
I'm on your side Ish and frankly I don't recommend engaging Jolene on this stuff too much. She has to be called out when she strays too close to some of hustory's more noxious ideologies but she has proven that this is just an issue where she has a massive blind spot.
That being said, do you believe that modern Jews are all that will make up Israel? I have to admit that as I read Revelations it sure seems like the other tribes show up.
Because of the general topic I have to pont out that I believe modern Jews are who they claim to be and have been preserved by God to show that His promises are true. I just have to admit that I think the other tribes are going to turn up in some surprising places.
That being said, do you believe that modern Jews are all that will make up Israel? I have to admit that as I read Revelations it sure seems like the other tribes show up.
Because of the general topic I have to pont out that I believe modern Jews are who they claim to be and have been preserved by God to show that His promises are true. I just have to admit that I think the other tribes are going to turn up in some surprising places.
Ok thanks Zec.
No, modern Israel as we know seems comprised of: 1) Levi (8% of Jews are Levi) 2) Judah (pretty much the rest) and then 3) Menasheh - not from the traditional "Jews" but recently discovered in India and brought back to Israel (immigration). Everyone else is "lost".
Granted Benjamin is assimilated into Judah for the most part but such a small tribe since they never really bounced back after being decimated.
For sure lost tribes will be rediscovered. I fully expect Ephraim to be found soon as Menasseh has been. Lately I'm considering if the Romani may be Menaseh or a mix of Menasheh and other Indian groups...
So I'm in agreement with you.
Especially since Revelations mentions all the tribes.
Except Dan
I was recently listening to an audio book by Hippolytus of Rome about the Antichrist, and he made the claim that Dan would be the tribe from which the Antichrist came. Partly based on this fact, and partly from the prophecies about Dan being a serpent and a lion's whelp. I hadn't heard this theory before -- having once believed he would be a western ruler (revived Roman empire) and more recently an Islamic ruler -- but apparently this is another train of thought that's still out there. Apparently, even the genealogies give Dan short shrift.
Well about the Muslim ruler, I have a theory with absolutely nothing to back it up, which means of course that I'm almost convinced of it truthfulness, that many of those tribes will be found in the Muslim world . I 'm always suspicious of any people group that quickly or easily embraces monotheism. That seems like an echo of truth from their past.
There are scripture verses that indicate differently. Here are a few. Ezekiel 36:10 stated that ".... And I will settle you after your old estates, and will do better unto you than at your beginnings: and ye shall know that I am the LORD."
Joseph was prophesied to be a fruitful bough who grows over the wall, and of his descendants in the exiled ten tribes it was written in Isaiah 49:20 that 'The children born during your bereavement will yet say in your hearing, ‘This place is too small for us; give us more space to live in.’ This is after YHWH has "taken her to the wilderness and spoken comfortable to her" see Hosea chapter two.
There are also a bunch of verses that mention Him taking his redeemed people to their OWN LAND. See Isa 14:1, Jer 23:8, Eze 34:13+25-28, 36:24, 37:14+21, 39:28 and none of those passages indicate that they would have to fight for it, or displace other people. So how do you see these verses fitting the modern state of Israel? I have heard that Jews who have converted to Christianity are denied citizenship in the modern state of Israel. They only want Jews there.
Besides, for it to be the "right place" it would have to fit the description of the latter day land of Israel in Ezekiel 38:8-12 and that modern state of Israel has NOT always been waste, is NOT recovered from war (brought back from the sword) the people there do NOT dwell in un-walled villages, and the people there are NOT dwelling safely and at rest. Besides "Mountains" in prophesy are nations, and that Israel is one state, here we have 50 each with it's own flag, and with laws that may be different from the other states. And to top it all off, this nation was made up largely of people who were in the new covenant, which was prophesied to be with both houses of literal Israelites.
So how do you reconcile these verses with your view?
This actually does nothing to explain why Christians object to the idea of being literal Israel, but this does explain why Jews don't like to think of Christians as Israelites.
YHWH told Israel that their descendants would inherit the nations, and that those cast off ten tribes would be called back in as "Sons of the living God" Hosea 1:10 He says that as long as the sun is still shining, they are a nation before him forever. (Jer 31:36)
Dude, I just started listening to it. Can you do me a favor, send me a PM with all the Audio books your listening to.
One problem you have Jolene is that you apply verses that are clearly referring to some future events as if they should have been active all the time. Things that are referring to the New Jerusalem, or the millenium or Christ's return you act like will have been constantly true throughout all of history. No people groups meet those criteria for all of history. Everyone would be disqualified, especially European Christians, if those verses were to be read the way you read them.
I perhaps was too subtle in my answer. I'll enumerate 2 reasons:
1-If Gentile Christians were indeed physical Israel as you suggest, then they would be required to live according to the Mosaic covenant because they would be part of the covenant.
2-Most Gentile Christians are not in the business of stealing something that isn't theirs and to make an outrageous claim like "hey I'm 1 millionth Jew and I've got some Canaanite blood too and lots of other stuff but hey I'm a full Israelite now give me my land". It's just too much of a stretch for most people without even getting into the commands in Torah which I mentioned which cause people to be cut-off from the Mosaic covenant, i.e. Israel.