Sunday, April 24, 2016

Israel's hiding place in The Wilderness during The Day of Yahuah

I still believe the doctrine that Israel will have a Hiding Place in the Wilderness during the three and a half years between The Rapture and the start of the Millennium.

The Woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, and verses 6 and 14 refer to her hiding in the Wilderness in a place prepared by God.

Matthew 14 also records Jesus warning to flee to the Wilderness when you see The Abomination of Desolation.

What I have come to disagree with is the popular view that this hiding place is in the land anciently ruled by Edom but today part of Jordan, Biblically identified with Bozrah, though for some reason popularly identified with the distinct Petra.

Daniel 11:41 is taken as assurance that Edom, Moab and at least part of Ammon (all in modern Jordan) will escape The Antichrist.  But I've already shown that Prophecy was about Caesar Augustus, and refers to those lands being ruled by the Nabatean kingdom of Aretas.  And even if it does have a second fulfillment, this passage still doesn't directly connect itself to this doctrine, and that lack of control is not guaranteed to be permanent, Rome did eventually conquer the Nabatean Kingdom under Trajan, the same Caesar who conquered Babylon for Rome interestingly.

The main basis for placing their hiding place in Bozrah is Micah 2:12.
I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold: they shall make great noise by reason of the multitude of men.
Thing is Bozrah is also a Hebrew term that means Sheepfold, and in context it looks like that is what's being said here, not a place name.  There are no near by references to Edom or other Edomite place names to verify this being the Edomite city.  And to further complicate things Jeremiah 48:24 refers to a Bozrah in Moab.

Amos 1:12 and Isaiah 34 refers to Bozrah specifically and Edom as a whole as being subject to God's Wrath during the Day of Warth.  Now I think that is arguably about Eschatological Edom being Rome/The West, but I think the geographical lands of Ancient Edom could play a role in that, Edom returning to their roots in a sense, not unlike Mystery Babylon returning to Shinar in Zechariah 5.

The final passage cited to prove this theory is Isaiah 63 where Jesus, described similarly to how he is in Revelation 19, is coming from Edom and Bozrah.  This passage also doesn't directly connect itself to the Wilderness hiding place doctrine but I think it's more likely to be relevant then Daniel.

It could be Jesus is traveling through Edom/Bozrah and it's neither the starting or ending point.  However it certainly is not the ending point, so this theory is dependent on saying he goes where Israel is hiding first and then marches to Armageddon.

I however think based on Genesis 28:17 that when Revelation 19:11 says Heaven Opened, that opening is in Beth-El.  Destroying The Armies of The Beast is the first thing Jesus will do, then he'll go to Israel to lead them back to Jerusalem.

So I think the reference to Edom and Bozrah in Isaiah 63 is the same as in Isaiah 34 and other Prophecies about Edom's final Judgment, like Obadiah, of Ezekiel 35-36.

So where do I think Israel will be protected?

I have argued before for seeing the Day of Yahuah as being a typological repeat of much of the history of The Exodus.  In that context I think perhaps this will be the same place they wandered in The Wilderness for 40 years in the days of Moses.  In fact I think the reference to her being fed there in 12:6 possibly alludes to a return of the Manna miracle.  Also Exodus 19:4 uses Eagles' Wings terminology, as does Isaiah 40:31.

We do also see a pattern throughout The Bible of individuals returning to this same location.  David spent some time in Paran which is also a place Israel spent some of the 40 year wandering.  Elijah spent some time at Mt Sinai.  We're never told where Jesus 40 days in the Wilderness was.  Paul in Galatians 1:17 says he was in Arabia for some of the time between his conversion and the beginning of his ministry.  Paul places Sinai in Arabia in Galatians 4:24-25.

That of course leads to debates about where those locations are.

I believe Mt Sinai is in Midian, possibly Jabal El Lawz, a view first popularized in The West by Ron Wyatt but later verified by the more reliable and trustworthy Bob Cornuke.

I've expressed in the past a willingness to believe certain Muslim claims that most modern Western Christians are adverse to.  Doesn't change my complete rejection of the Theology, Christolgoy and Soterology of Islam, or that Muhammad is not eligible to be a Biblical Prophet.  These issues come up in any post I give the Ishmael label to.

The Mt Sinai debate ties into that.  If Sinai is in what we today call the Sinai Peninsula then the Desert of Paran can't be in Arabia either, since Paran is also one of the locations mentioned during the 40 year wandering.

We're used to thinking of the total geography of the 40 year wandering as pretty small because The West since the time of Constantine has been forced to limit it to the Sinai Peninsula.  But once you place Mt Sinai in Arabia, then things can open up.

I want to point out that the Islamic view of Paran is not that it's just Mecca, they view the Wilderness of Paran as the entire Hijaz, that's pretty much all of Saudi Arabia that borders the Red Sea.  But there is also a more specific Mt Paran.

Eusebius and Jerome were Pre-Islamic non Arab Christians who placed Paran in Arabia Desertia, which is the Roman name for Saudi Arabia basically, south of Nabatea (Jordan mostly) and north of Arabia Felix (Yemen).

There are Samaritan sources like some texts of their Pentateuch and their apocryphal Book of Moses that seem to agree with identifying Paran with al-Hijaz and linking Ishmael to Mecca.  However a claim that Abraham built the Kaaba remains incompatible with Genesis.

Immanuel Velikvosky when arguing for his view of the Amalekites (which I agree with, with some qualifiers) in Ages in Chaos saw identifying Paran with al-Hijaz as supporting his theory based on his use of Arab Historians.

I'm even willing to consider valid the identification of the Baca of Psalm 84:6 with Bakkah an ancient name for Mecca.  Though that is pretty difficult to prove.

In context it does sound like a Desert or Wilderness location, I'm even wondering now if Psalm 84 could be directly applicable to Israel's End Times wildness protection.

Psalm 84 being a Davdic Psalm is taken as meaning it's probably a location linked to a place David was during his exile.  Well 1 Samuel 25:1 says David went to Paran after Samuel died.

The usage of Psalm 82 by Islamic apologists remains wrong in that Baca is not the destination of this Pilgrimage.  They basically try to argue Zion just means Sacred Land and thus can mean the Kaaba.  Zion only came to mean that after David placed his Tabernacle on Mt Zion, this being a Daivdic Psalm shows David's Zion is what he meant.  While he was in Paran he longed to return to Zion.

If you take the size of New Jerusalem in Revelation 21-22, and place it's center at Jerusalem or Beth-El, it's total land would include Mecca and Medina, and one or two of it's southern gates would be just south of them in Arabia.  So you could have people pilgrimage through those gates and past Mecca towards Zion.

So basically I think Arabia, not Jordan is where Israel will be protected during the last 1260 days.

Or maybe this and the Petra view don't conflict, since another suggested location for Mt Sinai is Jabel al-Madhbah near Petra.  Petra isn't named as such in the Bible being a Greek name and the city as we know it from the Greco-Roman period.  It was the Nabatean capital making it actually Ishmaelite territory just outside of Edom.   But again during the NT era the Nabateans ruled Edom, Moab and much of Amon.  But being connected to Ishmael's oldest son makes it logical to be near Paran.

It is named in The Bible as Cela/Sela/Selah, often translated Rock. Possibly first being given that name in 1 Samuel 23:25-28.  And having being given another name in 2 Kings 14:7.  It's refereed to in Obadiah 3 and Jeremiah 49:16.  Showing at times Edom did have it.  But it's linked to Kedar in Isaiah 42:11.  And it identified as being in The Wilderness in Isaiah 16:1.

It is used of the Rock Moses smote the second time, when smiting it wasn't what he was supposed to do, in Numbers 20, and mentioned in Psalm 78:16.  And it's used in Number 24:21 about the Kenites, the clan of the Father in-law of Moses.  And in Deuteronomy 32:13.  It's also possibly being mentioned in Judges 1:36.

Friday, April 22, 2016

Perhaps the Karaite reocking isn't as perfect as I thought

I had argued before strongly for the Karaite reckoning of when to begin a Hebrew Year.  And I certainly still reject the Rabbinic calendar and the Samaritan one.

Aviv is a name for the month now commonly called Nisan used in The Torah.  Because Aviv is a term related to the Barley Harvest (As someone not at all a Harvest expert I still don't quite understand it) the Karaite assumption is the Aviv has to happen before the month can begin.

The issue is in a case like this year where the Karaites and the Rabbis both had a second Adar, and celebrate Passover and Unleavened Bread in the 20s of April rather then the 20s of March.  The Barley Harvest is done before Passover happens meaning it's not possible to offer the First Fruits Wave Sheaf on the Morning after the Sabbath after Passover.

(Side note, I still agree with the Karaite view that Purim should be celebrated in 1st Adar when there are two, Esther defines it as being the 12th Month, but the Rabbis like doing it a month before Passover no matter what.)

I think the Goal should be to make sure the Barley Harvest is going on when Unleavened Bread happens.

What I think many people don't want to accept is that it may be the New Moon that begins the New Year might need to be not recognized as such till after the fact.  The Torah does not call for anything to be done on the New Years Day itself that isn't called for for every New Moon, the only New Moon that is a Holy Day is the New Moon of Tishri which marks the Midway Point of the year.

Ezekiel 45 makes the First Day of the First Month important (and the Seventh Day of the First Month also), it's unclear to me if those are for every year or just about when that Temple is first instituted. Whichever case that is, Ezekiel's Temple is instituted either at the start of The Millennium or the New Heaven and New Earth, either way when The Messiah reigns, so calendar ambiguities will no longer be a concern.

I think if the Barley is Aviv very soon after a New Moon, like within a Week, then that New Moon should be retroactively considered the start of the New Year.

Josephus said the first month of the Jewish year was Aries.  Back then the Sun was in Aries a month before when it is now, beginning around the Spring Equinox and ending in the midst of April.  I would not build doctrine on Josephus, and his goal was to define things in terms a Greek audience would understand, but it's still an interesting reference.

That there is a risk of missing Passover is part of why the Second Passover law was instituted in Numbers 9.

Update March 17th 2018:  There are some out there arguing that we should use the Equinoxes to decide what New Moon starts the year.   One of these I can't recommend since they're Lunar Sabbath supporters and very Racist.

But the Argument is that Israel in the Wilderness didn't have Barley to check, and neither did Moses on the Ark.  And that the Sabbatical and Jubilee years you weren't to be planting any crops.  Genesis one says the Sun, Moon and Stars are to be times and seasons are determined.

They also argue that tquwphah Strong Number 8622, means Equinox.  It means Circuit but apparently that's kind of what Equonox means.  I'm not entirely convinced of that argument however.

However they largely fall into the same issue as the Kariaites, that it should always be the first New Moon after the Spring Equinox, not simply the closest.  They say that if you started the year 13 days before the Spring Equnox, most of Tabernacles would happen before the Fall Equinox.

I think the answer isn't closest or first after, I think it's somewhere in between.  They're concerned with starting it too soon, but I feel it can be equally a problem to start it too late.

Again, no one is willing to consider that the New Moon that starts the year can maybe be identified as such afterwards.

Take March of 2018 when I'm writing this Update for example.  The New Moon (as in the first Crescent) will probably bee seen on the 18th or 19th.  In this case the Equinox is certainly soon enough afterwards that it seems extreme to delay the new year a whole month over it.

We need to make sure it's Spring when the Nisan Festivals happen.  But the start of Nisan can be sooner.

Update March 22nd 2018:

Another reason I would be more concerned about doing them a Month late then a month early is the Feast of Jeroboam.  Jeroboam's Feast wasn't in the 6th month it was in the 8th.  The people in Ancient Israel doing Tabernacles a month later where Jeroboamists.

For people attacking Christmas because they vaguely happening at the same time as Pagan holidays is so bad.  In a year like this one, not starting Nisan till nearly a full Month after the Equinox is going to place Passover on Walpurgisnacht/Beltaine and Halloween during Tabernacles.  But the truth is it's the Kabbalahist holiday Lag BaOmer a month after Passover that has it's origins as a Judaized form of the Mid Spring Pagan bonfire festival.

Sunday, April 17, 2016

The Imam Mahdi of Shia Islam

All the speculation among Christians about if the Antichrist might claim to be the Mahdi of Islamic Eschatology barely acknowledges the differences between the Sunni and Shiite views of the Mahdi.  But when it does in general the focus is on the Shia version because there are more details in their traditions to over analyze.  For example, it's the Shiites who call him Imam, to the Sunnis he is a Caliph.  I've tried to be an exception in my past speculations, but have hardly gone too deep into it.

The interesting thing I've discovered recently is, it's not just Christians who think the Imam Mahdi could be the Antichrist, there is a Sunni Website saying the Dajjal is actually the Shiite Imam Mahdi.  And their reasoning is very interesting given my own speculations on a number of subjects.  But I should of course say I doubt all or even most Sunnis would agree with everything on that site, it engages in a lot of weirdness similar to what I'm used to seeing from the most off the deep end Christian websites.

It kind of starts with how the Shiite view makes Imam Mahdi kind of quasi Divine, even giving him a Pre-existence.  While the Sunnis see the Mahdi as not even a Prophet.

Another claim of this website is that Shiites don't always admit to being Shiites, and so ideas it's skeptical of in traditional Sunni sources they suspect could have been planted by Shiites.  Since for most of Islamic history the Sunnis have been in control and haven't always allowed Freedom of Religion, one can't blame Shiites for having a history of hiding.

Today most Shiites live in Iran and Iraq.  Geographically that happens to be the lands associated with the Dajjal in the oldest Muslim eschatological traditions.

The Dajjal was originally expected to be a Jewish Messianic claimant.  This website points out many things that seem oddly Jewish to them about the Shia traditions.  Like Traditions that the Imam Mahdi will use the Jewish Name of God (I've read other Muslim websites agreeing with conspiracy theories that YHWH is actually a pagan god), and rule in the manner of David and Solomon.  And that specifically say the Imam Mahdi will have Jewish followers.

And many Jews have lived in the Irag/Iran region, going back to the exile and the Exilarchs.  Also early Caliphs resettled the Jews of Khyabar in Iraq.  I meanwhile could add my arguments that the Lost Tribes settled East of the Euphrates, and that the Persians and Iranians partly descend from Naphtali and the Eranites.  In the context of all that, seeing the Shiite Imam Mahdi and the Rabbinic Messiah Ben-Joseph as possibly the same personage could fit pretty well.  And that fits how Shiite traditions often treated Ali as the Joshua to Muhammad's Moses.

They are suspicious of prophecies that say he'll discover the Original Torah Scroll and Gospel, and rule the Jews and Christians according to their own laws.  And also re-discover the original Koran as well.  I've commented on the Mahdi's expected archaeological exploits before.

They are also suspicious of the Sufyani tradition, an enemy the Mahdi is said to defeat, who will rule parts of Syria and Iraq and will descend from Sufyan.  When the split between the Sunni and Shia happened the Sunni followed a son of Sufyan, so it could be possible to see Sufyani as a code for a Sunni leader (maybe even Sunni Mahdi claimant) from a Shia POV.  Today ISL/ISIS and it's desire to set up a Sunni Caliphate in Syria and Iraq could be seen as fitting the Sufyani description from a Shiite POV.

They also object to Shiite traditions that seem anti-Arab and even Anti-Mecca.  If you're thinking "how could any version of a Faith founded by Arabs be Anti-Arab" just look at all the Anti-Semitism in Christian history.

The Koran was written before the split happened obviously.  Thing is the word Shia was originally a word for Sect, so this site takes advantage of some Koran and early Haddith usage of that word, including references to the Dajjal having a Shia(Sect).

Thing about all this is, my emphasis on the overlooked fact that the Beast is actually against Babylon, and that his Seat is West of the Euphrates.  Tells me that an Imam Mahdi claimant is far more likely to be a Decoy Antichrist then the real one, and perhaps one of the Kings of the East, or the Terrible of the Nations.

Does that make a Sunni Mahdi claimant the real one?  Maybe, maybe not, there could be multiple Decoys.

And I still have my skepticism the Antichrist will be Muslim or Pagan at all.

Saturday, April 9, 2016

The Arnion of Revelaion

I'm going to begin this post by repeating (with small adjustments) some of what I said in this now possibly defunct theory.  Much of that post I already possibly retracted here.

The KJV of the Book of Revelation uses the word "Lamb" 29 times, all but once of Jesus.  All of them are the same Greek word (Strongs number 721), but in 3 different forms.  Arnion/Arniou/ArniO. 

This word however appears only once in the NT outside Revelation, in John 21:15.  There however it is a form distinct from any of the 3 used in Revelation, Arnia.  I'm not sure but I think that could qualify as a feminine form, while the 3 in Revelation clearly do not.  There it is used of Believers not of Jesus.  But unlike in English translations the Greek text doesn't seem plural there, like Jesus is calling The Church as a whole His Arnia.

The suggestion has been made before that "Lamb" is not an accurate translation of this word, and even been suggested before that it should be "Ram".  It's controversial because this word is rare even in Ancient Greek usage outside The Bible.  Other Greek words are known to have existed for Lambs and Rams and Goats, the other words for Ram aren't used in the New Testament however (I give no credence to the Septuagint).  The main one would be Krios, the Greek name for the constellation Aries, The Ram.

When John, this same Author, in his Gospel quotes in Greek John The Baptist calling Jesus "The Lamb of God" in 1:29&36 he uses Amnos (Strongs number 286).  Likewise Acts 8:32 and 1 Peter 1:19 when alluding to Isaiah 53:7 and the Passover Lamb also use Amnos, though Peter spelled it Amnou.  In Hebrew also Isaiah 53:7's "Lamb to the Slaughter" uses the same word used of the Passover Lamb in Exodus 12, Strongs number 7716, Seh.

Revelation 5 tells us the Arnion has seven horns.  Revelation 13:11 tells us the Beast out of The Earth has 2 horns like an ArniO.  While lambs do have horns they're very small and not too noticeable, and so outside Revelation no Biblical references to Lambs mention that they have horns.  But they are mentioned in reference to other animals, including the Ayil, and Goats.

And the Shofar (one of two Hebrew words translated Trumpet) was specifically a Trumpet made from a Ram's horn.  It's the Shofar sounded on the Yom Kippur proceeding the Jubilee Year in Leviticus 25:9.  And traditionally Rams horns are sounded on Yom Teruah, though the Biblicalness of that is debated by Kariates and others.

In the Book of Joshua chapter 6 at the fall of Jericho seven Shofars were sounded.  If Arnion means Ram then it would be natural to speculate a connection between the seven horns of the Arnion in Revelation 5, and the seven trumpets sounded by the seven angels later.  Other have argued those seven angels are also the seven spirits refereed to, though I've disagreed with that in the past, but I've now updated that post.  And Jesus is described as having a voice like a Trumpet.

The repeat is over now.

While I had argued very recently before for the idea of it meaning Ram, my considering that Ayil maybe doesn't mean Ram weakens much of that.

I also learned recently that Shofars are not always Ram's Horns, they can be among other things, Goat's Horns too.  (The KJV using Ram's Horn in Joshua 6 is mistranslated, the word used there is actually Jubilee).  So the Shofar part of the Ram theory about the Seven Horns in Revelation 5 can also apply to Goats.

Arnion meaning Goat has not been argued for before from what I can find.  But as I said Arnion was very rarely used.

The End Times are viewed as being largely about the Fall Feasts rather then the Spring Feasts.  While Numbers 28-29 called for a lot of sacrifices on nearly all the Leviticus 23 Holy Days.  Only one Fall Holy Day day is affiliated with a specific special Sacrifice the way Passover is.  And that's Yom Kippur, The Sin Offering which was a Goat, described in detail in Leviticus 16.

A Greek word for Goat is used 3 times in the New Testament, in 3 different forms (Strong number 2055 and 2056).  EriphOn and Eriphia in Matthew 25:32-33 the Sheep and Goats judgment, and Eriphon in Luke 15:29.  In Luke it's at the end of the Prodigal Son parable, used by the older brother to disparagingly describe the animal that had been offered for him in comparison to his brother now.  

So none of those are of a Goat as representing Jesus, and possibly all meant to be derogatory.  And neither is by the same human author as Revelation.  

While they begin with different letters Ar and Er could reflect a common etymological origin.

And the thing is Hebrew has two different words for Goat or Kid (the KJV translates both as both at different times). 

Sayir (Strong number 8163) and Ez (Strong number 5795).  The two words are often used in the same verse.  Anytime you see "a kid of the goats", Kid is Sayir and Goat is Ez.

Ez first appears in Genesis 15:9, the first appearance of several words for the Sacrificial Animals.  Saiyr first appears in Genesis 37:31 which also uses Ez.  Both are used in Leviticus 16, but Saiyr much more frequently.  And both are used of the Sin offerings called for in Numbers 28-29.  And both are used of the He-Goat or Rough-Goat that represents Greece in Daniel 8.

Azazel, the name of the Yom Kippur Scapegoat, is a compound word combining Ez and Azal (Strongs 235)  In a sense both Yom Kippur Goats represent Jesus, He both carries our Sins and Dies for them.  But I've also argued for a sense in which the Azazel goat could represent Satan, the Antichrist/Falseprophet or the unbelievers in general.  This could make sense with Goats representing those cast into Aionios fire (sheeps and Goats judgment).  So maybe that has something to do with the second beast having horns "like an ArniO".

In both Leviticus 17:7 and 2 Chronicles 11:15, Saiyr appears and is translated "devils" in the KJV.  The context is describing idols or false gods that are being worshiped.  Perhaps similar to the Greek goat-god Pan, or the Egyptian Goat of Mendes.  In Isaiah 13:21 and 34:14, Saiyr is translated Satyr.  A Greek mythological term that originally just refereed to the male counterparts of the Meaneds of Dionysus, but in time came to be thought of as Faun like creatures, which I think is what the KJV translators had in mind.

Isaiah 34 is about Edom, which is interesting since Saiyr is spelled the same as Seir in Hebrew, which is taken to mean Hairy and used to describe Esau's hairiness in Genesis 27.  Also in Genesis 27 Jacob uses Goat skins to mimic the feel of Esau's hairiness.  Song of Solomon 4:1 and 6:5 use Ez to describe the thickness of Shulamith's hair.

Ez seems to have no feminine equivalent used in Scripture.  But Saiyr has Saiyrah, used in Leviticus 4:28 and 5:6.   (Correction, Uzzah is a feminine form of Ez, but it only ever appears as a name.)

I'm thinking maybe Eriphon should be viewed as the Greek equivalent to one of those Hebrew words and Arnion the other.  Which is which I could go either way on, but I'm leaning towards Eriphon as Saiyr since Paul uses Esau as an idiom for the Gentiles in Romans 9-11.  The Septuagint I already know uses Arnion for neither, fortunately I don't trust it.  But it may be interesting to see how it uses Eriphon.  I don't feel like doing that myself right now, maybe for a future follow up.

Josephus in Antiquities of The Jews Book 3:231 says "ho men gar kata agnoian eis touto propesôn arna kai eriphon thêleian tôn autoetôn prospherei".  Which William Whiston translated, " But if a person fall into sin by ignorance, he offers an ewe lamb, or a female kid of the goats, of the same age;".  Arna is another form of Arnion, of it's NT appearances most similar to Arnia.

Josephus was not doing a Greek Translation of Scripture.  But he was here clearly alluding to one of the verses where the feminine Saiyrah was used.  Both verses also use Ez.  Leviticus 4:28 includes no animal names besides those, but 5:6 does.  It sounds like Josephus intent here was to be talking about Sin offerings, which are defined as being for sins committed in ignorance, which makes 4:28 the better fit.  But later the same account mentions Lambs, so it's still unclear even what Josephus meant Arna to mean.

Modern Satanism's use of Goat imagery has caused Christians to develop an unhealthy aversion to Goat imagery.  Even Torah observant Christians will talk about goats positively only when it's about Torah verses that require them too.  I've talked about the negative references to goats here, but let's not forget based on Leviticus 16, a Goat can represent Jesus just as much as a Lamb can.

Maybe Arnion isn't Greek in origin at all.  Because for other subjects I've attempted to research the Etymology of Arnon, the name of a River mentioned in The Hebrew Bible.  And found that name has been suspected to be related to Arabic, Aramaic and Syriac words for a type of Goat.

Rethinking the Ram and Deer

I did my Biblical significance of The Ram study last week.  And for the second time this month I may have to abandon a theory not long after posting it, (the other being my Historical Arthur post).  That theory could still be right, but some things have come to my attention as I've tried to go deeper on this.

I do still feel pretty certain my theory is correct that Ayil (Ram in the KJV) and Ayal (Hart in the KJV) were originally the same word, and Ayalah (Hind in the KJV) it's feminine form.  But I decided I really should consider the opposite conclusion one could draw from that.  That Ayil means Hart and it's the Deer who's Biblical significance has been obscured by all this.

Deer do seem to be the only major kind of animal listed among those clean to eat in Deuteronomy 14 that are never mentioned in Sacrifices, Ayil meaning Deer would change that.  Archaeologists have in fact found a large percentage of fallow deer among the remains of animals sacrificed at an altar at Mt Ebal.

I've been reading recently that Rams are not really a separate species of Animal from Lambs, Ram is a word used specifically of adult male Sheep.  Which would mean Ayalah as a female Ram would not make sense.  In Deuteronomy 14 Seh is used as a Prefix for both Kebes and Sayir (Goat).  Like Seh is the broader term and Kebes and Sayir refer to more specific animals.  Ewe Lamb gets used to translate the feminine form of Kebes.

In Numbers 28-29 the word Seh is never used, it's the Kebes that refers to the daily offerings, and the 7 or 14 Lambs offered on each New Moon and Holy Day.

The thing that has to be discussed on this are the horns.  The Ayil is absolutely described as having Horns, but while what Horn has come to mean in modern English does not apply to Deer Antlers, the Hebrew Qeren (Strongs 7161) absolutely can.  In fact you could argue getting caught in a thicket like in Genesis 22 does make more sense for Antlers then Ram's Horns. One Robert Graves book was originally titled The Roebuck in The Thicket, so it seems he considered that a Deer or Hart was originally the animal offered in Genesis 22.

The key issue is the Shofar however.  I read recently that not all Shofars are Ram's Horns, they can be made from Goat's Horns too.  But Antlers are made of actual Bone (that is often why they're not considered Horns in modern terminology, but I'd suspect to the ancients who hadn't put that much thought into it all Horns were thought of as Bone like), and Trumpets can't be made from them because they can't be hollowed out.

The thing is there is no passage in the Hebrew Bible defining the Shofar as coming from an Ayil, Kebes, Sayir, Ez, Seh or anything else, it's just refereed to without really explaining where it came from in depth.  New Torah students are often surprised how many of it's concepts the Torah doesn't fully explain.

In the KJV you see the term "Ram's Horns" in Joshua 6 and nowhere else.  The Hebrew word translated that however is actually Jubliee, same word translated that in Leviticus 25-27 and Numbers 36:4.  (It seems some were confused by the idea of that word being used for more then just the Jubilee year.)  No animal is mentioned, and only verse 5 uses the word for Horn, Qeren.

Bonus note, In Daniel the KJV translated Qeren as Cornet when used specifically of a Trumpet, likewise when Shofar and the word for the Silver Trumpets appear in the same verse the KJV renders one of them Cornet.  Cornet does look like it's derived from Qeren, the Hebrew Qoph sometimes becomes a K in transliteration which in turn can become a C when it makes the same sound.

So in Joshua 6 verses 4, 6, 8 and 13 "The Seven Trumpets of Ram's Horns" should be "The Seven Shofars of Jubilee".  And in verse 5 "Ram's Horn" should be "Jubilee Cornet".

Deuteronomy 14 does not put Seh before Ayal like it does both Kebes and Sayir.  And it's listed right alongside two other words for Deer, seemingly in their category more so then the Sheep category.

If Deer or a type of Deer is what Ayil is meant to refer to, that even more vindicates the theory about that Japanese Suwa Taisha festival.

What if the Greek myth linked to the constellation Aries is the origin of the Ram being misidentified as the Genesis 22 animal?  If it is an outcome of Hellenization, then the Lost Tribes who broke off before then wouldn't be influenced by it. 

Genesis 22:7&8 use Seh when Isaac is asking about the animal before hand, so that could justify a Lamb or Ram being affiliated with the story.  But we Christians know the future Lamb to be provided was Jesus.

This still has Naphtali in Genesis 49 identified with the same animal as Medo-Persia in Daniel 8.  Using a Deer rather then Ram to represent Persia isn't without precedent, today the Fallow Deer is a National Symbol of Iran.

I'm also rethinking what Arnion could mean, but I'll make that a separate post.

Monday, April 4, 2016

The Biblical Significance of The Ram, are Rams mentioned more often then we think?

Deuteronomy 14 is one of a couple of chapters of The Torah dealing with what animals are and aren't considered okay to eat.  In the KJV almost all animals cited elsewhere as animals offered in sacrifices to Yahuah are included here, Lambs, Goats, Bulls, Oxen, Pigeons and Doves.  And many additional animals too including multiple words taken as referring to Deer and similar animals, and multiple types of Poultry that leave me with little doubt a traditional Thanksgiving meal is Kosher.

But one of the known sacrificial animals seems absent, the Ram.  We know they would be okay to eat because of the broader instructions given here and in Leviticus 11 that tell how to tell the Levitical Cleanses even of Land Mammals the Bible never mentions at all.  But I still find it odd that as a clearly well known animal in The Bible, Rams are seemingly not mentioned.  In facts Rams seem to be mentioned only once in all of Deuteronomy, and that's in the Song of Moses in chapter 32.

The Hebrew word for Ram is Strongs number 352, Ayil.  The word first appears in Genesis 15:9, it's the word for Ram used in Genesis 22 of the one offered in place of Isaac, and in Exodus 29 which I'll bring up again later.  It's used throughout Leviticus where Rams are refereed to.  And in Numbers 28-29 where they are specified to be offered on most of the Leviticus 23 Holy Days.  And in Daniel 8 of the Ram that represents the Medo-Persian Empire.  And almost every time you see "ram" in the Old Testament of the KJV.

What's interesting is that according to the Strongs there are two Hebrew words spelled the exact same way as this word, AYL, but are pronounced differently thanks to the Aramaic derived vowel indicators that developed after the captivity.

One is Strongs number 353, Eyal.  Which is used only once, in Psalm 88 verse 4 where the KJV translates it "strength".  Not the only time "strength" is used to translate a rarely used and thus harder to define word.

The other is Strongs number 354, Ayal.  This is consistently translated by the KJV as "Hart" (or Harts when plural) and is in fact the word used every time you see "Hart".  It first occurs in Deuteronomy 12, but is also listed as an okay to eat Animal in Deuteronomy 14:5.  Indisputably the animal we call in English harts are Levitically clean, but plenty other animals listed here are basically the same kind, deer.

So what I'm thinking is maybe Ayal was not a separate word originally, but some confusion began probably during the captivity.  A Hart is a type of Dear, the idea of a Hebrew word for Ram becoming later misunderstood as a word for Dear could be relevant to my Japan and the Lost Tribes post.

Also strong number 355, Ayalah, is the feminine form of Ayal.  The KJV always translates this "Hind" or "Hinds".  It is used to describe Naphtali in Genesis 49:21 which I've argued could have significance for the Ram of Daniel 8.  That there is a lack of a feminine equivalent for Ayil I think could be further evidence it was meant to be the same word as Ayal.

Both "Hind" and "Hart" are used in the Song of Songs by Shulamith and the Beloved to refer to each other.  The Song also uses (sometimes in the same verses) "Roe" in both masculine and feminine form, a word elsewhere translated Roe, Buck and Roebuck, and also used in Deuteronomy 12&14.  I think they make sense as referring to different animals rather then two words for basically the same animal, but the other reading could work too.  Maybe these words for Ram and Deer being used together like this in the song is the origin of the confusion.  I think a lot of things about the Song of Solomon have confused people.

Now I shall move to The New Testament.

The KJV of the Book of Revelation uses the word "Lamb" 29 times, all but once of Jesus.  All of them are the same Greek word (Strongs number 721), but in 3 different forms.  Arnion/Arniou/ArniO.
This word however appears only once in the NT outside Revelation, in John 21:15.  There however it is a form distinct from any of the 3 used in Revelation, Arnia.  I'm not sure but I think that could qualify as a feminine form, while the 3 in Revelation clearly do not.  There it is used of Believers not of Jesus.  But unlike in English translations the Greek text doesn't seem plural there, like Jesus is calling The Church as a whole His Arnia.

The suggestion has been made before that "Lamb" is not an accurate translation of this word, and even been suggested before that it should be "Ram".  It's controversial because this word is rare even in Ancient Greek usage outside Revelation.  Other Greek words are known to have existed for both Lambs and Rams, the other words for Ram aren't used in the New Testament however (I give no credence to the Septuagint).  The main one would be Krios, the Greek name for the constellation Aries, The Ram.

When John, this same Author, in his Gospel quotes in Greek John The Baptist calling Jesus "The Lamb of God" in 1:29&36 he uses Amnos (Strongs number 286).  Likewise Acts 8:32 and 1 Peter 1:19 when alluding to Isaiah 53:7 and the Passover Lamb also use Amnos, though Peter spelled it Amnou.  In Hebrew also Isaiah 53:7's "Lamb to the Slaughter" uses the same word used of the Passover Lamb in Exodus 12, Strongs number 7716, Seh.

Aries, the name of the Ram constellation, is it's Latin rather then Greek name, but Latin and Greek have many similar words due to their common Indo-European origin.  That Aries and Arnios begin with the same sound is interesting.

If you are curious how Arnion is used in the Septuagint, it's iffy.  It's in 4 verses, none of which use Seh in the Hebrew.  Psalm 114 in verses 4 and 6, and in Jeremiah in 11:19 and 50:45.  In three of those you will see Lamb in the KJV but for the Psalms the Hebrew is using a word for flock, that is also used in Jeremiah 50:45 and translated "flock".  Tsone, Strongs number 6629, in the Septuagint that is the word rendered Arnia, it uses the John 21 version which fits the context.

In Jeremiah 11:19 it's Kebes which the KJV always renders Lamb or Sheep but the Strongs (where it's number is 3532) defines it as being a Ram of a certain age, and it's also used in Exodus 29 as possibly a synonym for Ayil, Seh isn't used in Exodus 29.  In the Septuagint of Jeremiah (It's chapter 29 there, some are numbered differently in the LXX) that is clearly the word translated Arnion.

Ayil is used in both Psalm 114 verses but not in the Jeremiah ones.  In the Septuagint it's Psalm 113 and Ayil is Krios while Tsone is Arnia in both verses.  I feel like all four of those examples together point to this word never being used for Ayil but for other words used as synonyms for Ayil.

Upon further study of the usage of Kebes it is used in many verses where Ayil or Ayal is used clearly as distinct, and in Deuteronomy 14 Seh is used as a prefix of both Kebes and Goat.  So interpreting Arnion as Ram not Lamb is still dependent on the Septuagint being wrong (as I feel it often is) in at least the Jeremiah 11 verse..

Replacing Lamb with Ram when you see it in Revelation arguably takes nothing away from the significance, both were sacrificial animals.  The most unique attribute of the Lamb was as the Passover Sacrifice, Revelation is more about the fulfillment of the Fall Feasts.  But it can potentially add a lot when you study the significance of the Ram.  A Lamb was mentioned in Genesis 22 but it was a Ram that was provided, both Isaac and the Ram represent Jesus, The Lamb of God.

One reason to support seeing the Arnion of Revelation as a Ram rather then a Lamb is that Lambs are usually gentile animals while Rams are more aggressive in nature, hence Aries is similar to Ares the name of the Greek god of War.  Revelation 6 refers to the Wrath of the Arnion.

The Arnion of Revelation can arguably be viewed as Jesus serving as The High Priest.  Exodus 29 specifies that Ram's Blood is to be shed to consecrate a new High Priest.

Revelation 5 tells us the Arnion has seven horns.  Revelation 13:11 tells us the Beast out of The Earth has 2 horns like an ArniO.  While lambs do have horns they're very small and not too noticeable, and so outside Revelation no Biblical references to Lambs mention that they have horns.

But their Horns are a big part of the Ram's Biblical significance.  Starting in Genesis 22 where it was the Ram's horns caught in the thicket.  And the Shofar (one of two Hebrew words translated Trumpet) was specifically a Trumpet made from a Ram's horn.  It's the Shofar sounded on the Yom Kippur proceeding the Jubilee Year in Leviticus 25:9.  And traditionally Rams horns are sounded on Yom Teruah, though the Biblicalness of that is debated by Kariates and others.

In the Book of Joshua chapter 6 at the fall of Jericho seven Shofars were sounded.  If Arnion means Ram then it would be natural to speculate a connection between the seven horns of the Arnion in Revelation 5, and the seven trumpets sounded by the seven angels later.  Other have argued those seven angels are also the seven spirits refereed to, though I've disagreed with that in the past, but I've now updated that post.  And Jesus is described as having a voice like a Trumpet.

I've talked before about the significance of the fact that the Second Beast/False Prophet has two "Horns like a Lamb".  My argument there is no less valid, it's still the same word and still an animal linked to Jesus right from The Torah.  What can be added to that is a potential connection to Daniel 8, we all know the first Beast is connected to the beasts of Daniel 7.  If ArniO means Ram then the second beast could be connected to Daniel 8.

But the Earth Beast isn't a real Ram, it has horns "like a Ram".  Alexander The Great, the notable Horn of the He-Goat, after he defeated Darius III started ruling like a Persian King.  Because of this there are coins depicting him as a two horned Ram.  And that imagery is why in the Arabic world he became known as Dhul-Qarnain, which means Two-Horned.  Maybe none of that is relevant, I certainly don't think Alexander is the False Prophet, but there could be a new Rabbit hole there to chase down.

I've also hear that some of the Herodian Monarchs like Herod Agirppa (of Acts 12) used a Ram as one of their Royal Symbols.  I've yet to actual verify this though so I'm reserving judgment on it.

Now what could my above Hart/Hind theory add to Arnion speculation?

This is why I considered their usage in the Song of Songs notable. Among other things the Song of Songs has a typological application about Christ and his Bride.  In Revelation 19:7-9 the Marriage Supper is of the Arniou, not any other title of Christ that Revelation uses.  And in 21:9 New Jerusalem is called the Arniou's Wife.  And I already suggested that in his Gospel this same author used the word's feminine form of The Bride, John 21.  What if Ayalah is what Jesus actually said in Hebrew?

The Song of Solomon calls The Beloved an Ayal in the very last verse.

The Mazaroth and the Gospel in The Stars

I've grown more skeptical of that theory then I used to be.  But I've talked about it in the past, and many people I converse with still hold to it.  And I already mentioned Aries in this study anyway.

The Book of Jubilies (17:15 and 18:3) and some other traditions imply that around Passover was when the offering of Isaac happened, the Samaritans also commemorate it during Unleavened Bread..  According to Stelarium on the day I believe Jesus was Crucified, April 6th 30 AD, the Sun was in Aries.  Josephus also linked the beginning of the Hebrew Year to the month the Greeks called Aries.

Over the last two thousand years the ecliptic have moved about a month.  So where the Sun was at Passover in the days of Christ it wold be at for Second Passover now.  Which could be interesting for theories of an eschatological significance for Second Passover.

The Greek myth affiliated with Aries does seem like a corruption of the story of Genesis 22, possibly another influence of Edomites and Danites who traveled to Greece/Javan (Ezekiel 27).
In Greek mythologyAthamas (/ˈæθəməs/Ancient GreekἈθάμας) was a Boeotian king.
 Phrixus and Helle (his twin son and daughter) were hated by their stepmother, Ino. Ino hatched a devious plot to get rid of the twins, roasting all the town's crop seeds so they would not grow. The local farmers, frightened of famine, asked a nearby oracle for assistance. Ino bribed the men sent to the oracle to lie and tell the others that the oracle required the sacrifice of Phrixus. Athamas reluctantly agreed. Before he was killed, though, Phrixus and Helle were rescued by a flying golden ram sent by Nephele, their natural mother. Helle fell off the ram into the Hellespont (which was named after her) and died, but Phrixus survived all the way to Colchis, where King Aeëtes took him in and treated him kindly, giving Phrixus his daughter Chalciope in marriage. In gratitude, Phrixus gave the king the golden fleece of the ram, which Aeëtes hung in a tree in his kingdom.
What could I say that isn't obvious?  The parallel possibly carries over into Genesis 24, with Chalcioe as Rebekah.

Adding a twin sister who dies is the darkest corruption of it.  But theologically what matters most is how the Monotheism is removed.

Traditions have speculated that the first two Shofars were the horns of the Genesis 22 Ram and continued to be used all the way down to the Temple of Solomon, so the idea of remains of this Ram becoming a sacred relic also maybe has a basis.

I should note that there is also speculation that some of the ancient inhabitants of Cholchis may have been descendants of Calcol son of Zerah son of Judah and Tamar.  According to some ancient secular pagan pre-christian Greek writers like Herodotus and Diodorus Sicilus they apparently practiced circumcision, and some even used that to speculate they had a common origin with the Jews and Dannus as descendants of foreigners kicked out of Egypt.

There were other Israelites named Calcol.  The British Israelites are in denial that the Chalcol son of Mahol who's Wisdom was compared to Solomon's can't be the same person.  So I don't doubt that the Cholchins were Danites.

Or maybe it's possible descends of Laban's son moved the Cholchis region at some point?  Since Aeetes is kind of taking the Laban role, Laban in Genesis 24 plays the role that is traditionally the role of the Father of the Bride, though he's actually Rebekah's brother.  And we're told gifts were given to Laban and to their mother.

[Update:  I may have to retract this, the Ayil part explained here and the Arnion part explained here.]

Saturday, April 2, 2016

The Antichrist may not be as Popular as we assume

Even many of the Bible Prophecy teachers that question our Hal Lindsey based assumptions still cling to this one.  Of course The Antichrist will be the most popular kid in school, how could he not be?

I'm not saying it's a sure thing he won't be, much of this is still unclear to me.

But what a face value reading of Revelation 13 without preconceived assumptions seems to tell me is that the whole world worships The Beast because if they don't The False Prophet will kill them.  The Beast conquerors the world, his ability to rule it comes from Satan and from military conquest "who is able to make war with him?".

The whole world Wonders after the Beast when his Mortal Wound is healed.  That means they're shocked and amazed, doesn't necessarily mean they like him.  In Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice the whole world Wonders after Superman, some love him and some hate, the latter camp seems to be the majority till the end, but they are all wondering after him.

If Hitler's mortal wound was healed would everyone suddenly forget what we all hate about him?  No, the wonderment would be one of horror, like we just saw confirmation that Vampires are real.

"By Peace he shall destroy many" in Daniel 8 refers to when Antiochus Epiphanies broke a peace agreement he had made.  The Antichrist may or may not do something similar, but there is no basis for saying it clearly means he ushers in some global communist utopia based on world peace.  The generally most indisputable type of the Antichrist in The Bible is Antiochus Epiphanes, who was anything but a popular ruler.

The warnings not to be deceived in the last days are to the Church not the World, the World is already wrong and already under Satan's control, he doesn't need an Antichrist or False Prophet when it comes to them.

The Christians who are observant and take their faith seriously and The Bible literally tend to be the ones who assume anything popular with the World is bad (I think we assume that far more absolutely then we should, and in the modern very liberal world, use that to justify being Pharisees, because the one thing liberals agree with the New Testament on is that the Pharisees were dicks).  So really it's virtually impossible for someone who's as popular with The World as the Antichrist is currently assumed to be (like Obama) to deceive The Church.

This ties into my belief that there will be a Decoy Antichrist(s), that people who seem to fit one or many of the current trendy Antichrist views will pop up and the Church will be too busy being paranoid about them to notice the Wolf in Sheep's clothing.

I find it amusing when Rob Skiba acts like he's being a rebel within the Church with his Anti-Christmas rants.  The majority of nominal Christianity may not care, but nearly everyone agrees with him and not me that the traditional date is wrong.  Rob says he was raised an Independent Baptist and some of them may happen to be the only radical Christians who dismiss the Christmas complaints.  But stuff about how Pagan Christmas is has aired on VCY, that's as mainstream as it gets within Evangelical American Christianity.  It would take only 1% of Christians to disagree with Rob for him to get the hate mail he complains about.

As I've pointed out before The Beast will destroy Babylon, because it hates her.  It is Babylon that is popular with the World, and the Beast is ultimately against Babylon, though it may use her system at first.

Not only do I think he'll seek to appeal to Christians, but maybe even specifically to Torah observant Christians.  There are lots of hints people have noticed that suggest he'll actually enforce The Torah on the world, and claim to be Messiah Ben-Joseph.  Even the Mark of the Beast could be based on an overly literal interpretation of Deuteronomy 6:8.
And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.
 The Rabbinc Jewish Tefillin custom that involves having texts bound to one's right arm or forehead during daily prayer.  Is based on this very passage.

But what about how he will "think to change times and laws"?  You may ask.

That's from Daniel 7:25, and I'm growing unsure that even is Antichrist relevant, I think it's possible the Little Horn of Daniel 7 is someone after The Millennium, possibly Gog, and may post on that in the future.

But either way Daniel 7 is Aramaic Daniel, it's about how he relates to the World not Israel.  So it could very well be that from that POV his enforcing the Torah's Laws and Calendar on the world would fulfill exactly that.  Because right now The World does not follow the Hebrew Calander, associating that detail with a rejection of the Hebrew Calander is basically a Preterist or Historicist logic, saying The Antichrist already did this when Catholicism was born.

Interestingly Daniel 2:21 attributed "changing Laws and Seasons" to the God of Israel (It is popular to assume Nisan was not the beginning of the year before the Exodus).  So that could further back up the changing of times to being in favor of not opposition to the Hebrew calendar.

And there is this theory which has lots of assumptions I'm still not sure on but is interesting.  And also my theory about a counterfeit Ark/Mercy Seat.

And in John 5:43 when Jesus says "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive."  That I believe was fulfilled by Barabbas.

He could even find a Hebrew Bible basis for Decapitation being his preferred form of execution in Jehu.  Jehu is one of the more complex figure sin The Bible, he has the best review of any Northern kingdom ruler, and fulfilled Prophecies of Elijah after being anointed by a Prophet sent be Elisha. An old movie was made called Sins of Jezebel that ignores the bad aspects of Jehu and simply painted him as a good guy.  Not unlike that 90s Solomon movie which spent a lot of time propping up Jeroboam and stopped before his fall into idolatry.

Jehu specifically decapitated he Priests of Baal.  And Baal is exactly who Hebrew Roots Christians accuse mainstream Christianity of unwittingly worshiping.