Friday, October 28, 2016

Could The Beast of Revelation 17 possibly be a different Beast?

I've suggested one bold new theory on how Revelation 17 ties into the rest of the book already.  Now I have another one.

The parallel imagery of Seven Heads and Ten Horns leads to an assumption the Beast of Chapter 17 is the same one we saw in Chapter 13.  And references to The Beast made in chapters 14-16 are clearly the Beast out of the Sea.

But The Dragon also had Seven Heads and Ten Horns and that is indisputably a different entity.  The Beast of Chapter 17 also has in common with the Beast out of The Sea over The Dragon being called a Beast (a term that arguably strictly speaking means Land Mammals and so wouldn't apply to a Dragon).  And also terminology that seems to imply one of the Seven Heads is an individual who has died and been resurrected, but how that idea is communicated is different.  But it is called a Scarlet Beast, which is a variation of the Color Red, so the Revelation 17 Beast is affiliated with the same Color as The Dragon.

References to The Beast of Chapter 13 in other chapters usually mention The False Prophet, or The Mark, or the Image.  But in Chapter 17 it seems to be The Woman, Mystery Babylon, who is serving The False Prophet's function, as a simultaneously religious and economic system.

However Revelation 11's Beast is described with terminology elsewhere used only in Chapter 17, the Beast that Ascends out of the Bottomless Pit/Abyss, and goes into Perdition. 

I've also noted recently that it is strictly speaking the Ten Horns not the Eight King himself who hates and attacks The Harlot.

I've talked a lot on this Blog about the possibility of a Decoy Antichrist, possibly to be identified with The Terrible of The Nations of Ezekiel.  And while I've connected that figure to themes of Revelation like the Kings of The East, I had lacked a clearly specific place for him.  Until within the last month when I thought of this possibility.

However, it then occurred to me, what if they are the same Beast and yet different in terms of which of the Seven Heads is the main Head in mind?

I have laid out already my main view on the Seven Kings.  In identifying them with modern Geopolitical entities, The Lion is Iraq and/or ISIS, the Bear is Iran and perhaps parts of Iraq currently controlled by Iran via the Mahdi Army (the Medes being The Kurds and the Persians being the Shiites).  The four heads of the Leopard are Greece, Macedonia, Turkey and Egypt, and the Fourth Beast/Seventh Head (the one with the Ten Horns) is the European Union.

When we separate the Death and Resurrection imagery of 13 and 17.  Only 13 requires a Mortal Wound, sometimes assumed to specifically be a head wound but that forgets that the use of the word Head is itself symbolic in these chapters.  Meanwhile my argument that the Eight King must be one of the first Five applies solely to Chapter 17.

I feel the one in 13 make most sense if the Resurrection/healing of the Wound itself happens in the End Times, before the eyes of the World.  While the one in 17 I think could maybe have been Resurrected in the past, perhaps in 30 AD (Matthew 27:52-53) as part of fulfilling Daniel 12, but then was sealed in the Abyss.

If The Terrible of The Nations is someone who lived in the Past resurrected in the End Times.  Based on Ezekiel 29&30 the first obvious candidate is Nebuchadrezzar, as I alluded to in my last post.

There are people arguing Nebuchadrezzar is the Antichrist, including a Google Group.  Much of the argument for that is the Terrible of the Nations passages, because they overlook the last part of Ezekiel 30 which identifies the Terrible of The Nations with the one who gives not who receives the Mortal Wound.  And the Prophecy against the Prince (not King) of Tyre in chapter 28 could also back that up.

However, the fact that Daniel 4 depicts Nebuchadrezzar as being Saved I view as a problem with the whole "Goeth into Perdition" detail.  Though perhaps that is less definitive since I'm now pretty much a Universalist, and Nebuchadrezzar wasn't a Church Age believer.  But it still seems odd to me, and I've yet to see a Nebuchadrezzar is the Antichrist argument address Daniel 4.

Nebuchadrezzar was the first of the Seven Kings in my view.  The remaining four of the first five would be Cyrus, Alexander The Great (or maybe a Ptolemy), Antigonus or Demetrius, and a Seleucid King.

Of those I feel inclined to rule out the Ptolemies and maybe also Alexander on the grounds that if a Beast of Revelation is a Pharaoh of Egypt, that is definitely the Revelation 13 Beast.  Also both Cyrus and Alexander I view as like Nebuchadrezzar confirmed to most likely be among the saved, so if that rules him out it maybe rules them out too.

There is not much to Biblically make Antigonos or Demetrius significant.  But if you think The Antichrist is also the Little Horn of Daniel 8, then that makes the Seleucids, especially Antiochus Epiphanes, a pretty strong candidate.  And if the Beast out of the Sea is a Ptolemy, then one of his adversaries being a Seleucid would fit well.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Some more Mystery Babylon issues

First I want to talk a little about 1 Peter 5:13.  I've argued before against Peter going to Rome, and explained why in general placing Babylon anywhere other then Babylon comes from that Catholic Dogma.

There is a third theory about what Peter meant, and that is that he was referring to Babylon in Egypt, because this passage also refers to Mark who tradition links to Alexandria.  There is a fortress in Egypt that was called Babylon for some reason.  It is part of the embryo of what became Cairo, the Islamic/Modern Capital of Egypt.  And it was in On/Heliopolis, which did have a Jewish Population, and I mention potential Old Testament Prophetic relevance to On in an Isaiah 19 study.  One ancient explanation for this fortress being called that implies it could have been called that as far back as Isaiah's time.

Generally no one arguing for that theory attempts to then suggest that that is the Babylon of Revelation.  However if you made that suggestion it could add a whole new angle to my developing Egyptian Antichrist theories.  However since there is no Biblical confirmation of Mark's association with Egypt, more evidence would need to be uncovered for me to consider such a theory.

I decided however that before I state definitively that what Peter meant by Babylon must be the Babylon of Revelation.  I should look at the Greek texts because I know many New Testament names often appear in different forms.  And indeed when I checked I saw that Peter distinct from any other reference to Babylon spelled it with an Iota at the end.  Babyloni.

Ending with an Iota like that is I think in Greek usually a diminutive, meaning it could be translated "Little Babylon".  That could fit the Babylon in Egypt which was a small settlement at the time.  But I could also see it being used by Jews of Seleucia, a city who's Jewish population of the period had moved there from Babylon a few decades earlier.  But it certainly would not fit how one would use Babylon as a code for Rome.

[Correction on the above paragraph, I've now researched it and it makes the Daitive Singular form.  In which case there is no solid reason to think it refers to a different place then any other references to Babylon]

On to the second part.

Chuck Missler likes to define End Times Babylon on three pairs of Chapters, Isaiah 13&15, Jeremiah 50&51, and Revelation 17&18.  Isaiah and Revelation I've talked about extensively but not the Jeremiah one, it is the longest, I have read it, but I feel I need to read it more to discern what specific clues it has.

One detail about it I do want to address now however is that many will insist Jeremiah mentioning Nebuchadrezzar by name must be proof only a Preterist interpretation is valid.

First of all, when Babylon fell to Cyrus Nebuchadrezzar was dead by then too, unless you believe the fringe theory that Nabonidus was the same person.  I am intrigued by some aspects of that argument, but it has major holes in my view.

Second, Revelation 17 seems to define the Eight King as a King who ruled before John's time resurrected.  So you can't entirely rule out Nebuchadrezzar personally being there in the Futurist interpretation.  But that's a Rabbit hole for another study or two.

Third and last of all.  The two verses in this two chapter Prophecy that mention the name of Nebuchadrezzar, are not like similar verses mentioning him by name elsewhere in Jeremiah or in Ezekiel.  The language used in context does not necessarily make Nebuchadrezzar himself contemporary with the Judgment in question.  They are 50:17 and 51:34.

The former is about how this connects to it being him who conquered Jerusalem.  The latter simply about Babylon being his legacy.  Saddam Hussien's reconstruction projects in Babylon and many other cities (including Basra) were driven by his personal obsession with Nebuchadrezzar, he depicted himself as Nebuchadrezzar on his coins.  So yes even modern Iraq is directly the legacy of Nebuchadrezzar.

Friday, October 14, 2016

The Manna Miracle and the origins of The Sabbath, Exodus 16

The precedent for The Sabbath was absolutely set by the Creation week recorded in Genesis 1&2.

But there is a debate about if it was kept by believers as a custom before the Exodus.   We have evidence of what animals are clean and unclean being known in Genesis.  But nothing from Genesis 3 on through the first Passover that in any way alludes to Patriarchs or Hebrews keeping The Sabbath.

Now Exodus 16 which is the account of The Manna miracle is constantly cited as proof it was known before the giving of The Law.  Indeed the Decalogue in Exodus 19 refers to it as something they already knew.

The thing is, if you study Exodus 16 carefully, it seems to be presenting this story as the origin of The Sabbath.  Nothing in here suggests it was already being practiced.

On the 15th day of the Second Month, the Israelites complain.  Then Moses tells them what is about to happen.  This was BTW the month following the very first Passover.

At evening, when the 16th started, Yahuah's Glory appeared onto them and they eat Quail (and no vice president had to shoot anyone in the face).  Then in the morning of that day they found the first Manna.

On the 6th day that the Manna fell they were instructed to gather twice what they usually did so they'd have Manna the following day which they were told not to collect Manna on.  And thus that seventh day was named The Sabbath.

Now to many this would be an argument against Christians needing to keep it.  I however see no correlation between what we have to keep and what came in with Moses, to me those issues are addressed elsewhere.

I'm writing this here because I feel understanding this could help us understand the Eschatological importance of The Sabbath.  Because the Manna is often seen as another miracle repeated in Revelation in chapter 12.

If The Sabbath was a rule already.  That would have to make this 15th of Iyar a Sabbath, but they don't seem to be keeping a Sabbath at the moment and no comment is made on it.  Yahuah waits till it's Sunday to speak to the people.

If you counted hypothetical Sabbaths backwards from this.  The 8th and 1st of that Iyar would have been Sabbaths.

And if the Nisan of the first Passover had 30 days, then it's Sabbaths would have been the 24th, 17th, 10th and 3rd.  But if it had 29 days then they would have been the 23rd, 16th, 9th and 2nd.

The latter would happen to fit my model for the Nisan of the Crucifixion as a Thursday supporter.  The former would happen to fit what is usually argued for by Wednesday supporters.  But you can't get a Friday model from it.  That doesn't prove anything but it's amusing.  And either of those would put the hypothetical anniversary in advance of The Ascension on the 27th of Iyar, which might be interesting.

Maybe God arranged this so it would happen to fit where The Sabbath would haven been if it'd been being kept since Adam.  But either way, I'm convinced now that the origin of The Sabbath as a custom kept by humans is in Exodus 16.

Nehemiah 9:12-15 also states that it was at this time that Yahuah made The Holy Sabbath known to them.

Thursday, October 13, 2016

Jesus wasn't Buried the same day He was Crucified.

Matthew 27:57-58 after Jesus had died says.
"When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple: He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered."
That is in the Hebrew reckoning the beginning of the next day, when the Evening had come.  Mark's account of the same event in 15:42-44 also says this.  It's lacking from Luke and John's accounts but isn't contradicted, maybe because they were writing for more gentile audiences.

All the ongoing debates on what day to place the Crucifixion seem to not be aware of this detail.  Typologically it can also fit Numbers 33:4 which says the 15th of Nisan was the day the Egyptians buried their First Born.  Jesus is the Firstborn of Creation.

John 19 calls when Jesus was on The Cross the Preparation Day of the Passover, which was the 14th of Nisan, unambiguously.  Later in John 19, and in the Synoptic accounts, Jesus burial is described as being on the Preparation Day of the Sabbath.  It seems people have assumed they must be the same Preparation, but they are not, if the Sabbath fell on the 16th of Nisan, then the first day of Unleavened Bread would also be the Preparation day for the weekly Sabbath.

The strongest argument the Friday Crucifixion people have is their insistence we're torturing the text in insisting the 15th of Nisan would be called a Sabbath regardless of the day it fell on.  While Leviticus 23 does say not to do servile work that day, those restrictions have been interpreted as not as strict as the weekly Sabbath.  The Tishri Holy Days use the word Sabbath to describe these days, but it's not used of the first day of Unleavened Bread, though you could argue it is of the seventh day of Unleavened Bread in that the word Seventh is essentially the same word.

The basis for defining Friday as preparation for the Sabbath goes back to the Manna account in Exodus 16.

The Friday Crucifixion people are also right that you don't need a full 72 hours to get to the Third Day.   The desire of Wednesday proponents like Chuck Missler to mock that is unwittingly also mocking how the day for Circumcision and the Eight day of Tabernacles are counted.  I personally see every reference to Jesus Rising on the Third Day as the Third Day of Unleavened Bread, the 17th of Nisan.  The 17th of Nisan is also important in Esther and possibly in The Flood account.

However Friday proponents can't get three days AND three nights.  They can only get two nights (Friday/Saturday and Saturday/Sunday).  And it's similar with this new argument that every "First day of The Week" in the New Testament is really the Sabbath, I don't see how that model can get three nights either, because the third night has always been in Hebrew reckoning Sunday night.

Debating what day Jesus was Crucified I've seen rarely looks at the arguments typologically in Genesis 1.

Wednesday model supporters are also often people paranoid about doing anything on Sunday being Sun worship.  Well in the Biblical Week the Sun and Moon were created on Woden's day.

I place the Crucifixion on Thursday, now with a different argument then I used to.  That's the day God first Created Life, because Biblically plants aren't Life.

I now place Jesus burial on the Sixth day.  The same day the First Adam was formed out of The Earth is the day the Last Adam was placed in it.

Then Jesus Rested on The Sabbath, and rose again on the Eight Day, a New Beginning.  But also the Third Day of Unleavened Bread.  It's also First Fruits and the day God made Light.  It was also on a Sunday that the Manna first fell from Heaven.

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

The Lunar Sabbath issue

Earlier today (October 11th 2016) I watched this video.  And this was the first time I heard of the Lunar Sabbath issue.

First assumption I had was this involved the Sabbath being kept on the multiple of 7 days of each month.  As I looked it up elsewhere (the Hope For Israel site which I have many issues with starting with it's Racism) I saw that it actually involves not counting the New Moon as a work day (a detail Rob clearly missed) and making the Sabbaths the 8th, 15th, 22nd and 29th of each month.

As I contemplated this I was reminded of how I'm always puzzled by all these often conflicting Rabbinic customs about what to do if the Sabbath falls on the 14th of Nisan or 10th of Tishri or some other inconvenient day, and would ask myself "why didn't God deal with that in The Torah?"

But then as I contemplated it more I remembered that Jesus said "God made The Sabbath for Man not Man for The Sabbath".  Which means you really shouldn't stress about it.

Both key arguments Rob made against it are flawed.  One I alluded to already, you never work more then 6 days because of the New Moon.  The other about God creating the Moon on the 4th day is that I feel God created the Moon in it's 4th day (or 18th day in a Tabernacles Creation Week theory) position, I don't think the first New Moon was a Wednesday.

The biggest flaw to me is that this theory can't explain how Pentecost works, how can the Fiftieth day also be the day after a Sabbath?

In fact First Fruits and Pentecost as a whole weaken the argument.  If those days were always supposed to be the same day of a Month then God would have just said that like he did with the other Holy Days.  Instead he said the morning after the Sabbath.  This is my same argument against the Rabbis starting the Omer on the 16th of Nisan.

A minor observation is everything I read so far seemingly ignores that sometimes a Hebrew month has 30 days, meaning a single work day between the 29th Sabbath and the New Moon in this model.  I have long theorized that in God's original perfect creation all years were 360 days, 12 months of 30 days each.  I do NOT however then interpret that to mean Daniel 9 should be counted as 360 day years.

This model also overlaps with the absurd Friday Crucifixion model.  The Thursday model which I favor and even more the Wednesday model need the weekly Sabbath to NOT be the 15th special Sabbath in that particular Nisan.  And as Greek students know the text itself refers to there being plural Sabbaths passing between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection.

Jesus was Crucified on the 14th, Liberated Sheol on the 15th, rested on the Weekly Sabbath on the 16th, and Rose again on the 3rd day of Unleavened Bread which was the 17th of Nisan, the day Mordecai was honored and Haman hanged in Esther, and probably the day Noah's Ark landed on Ararat.

I did once did calculations and concluded that IF the original first month was Tishri as many assume, and IF my originally months were 30 days theory is true. Then the 10th and 17th of of the first Nisan would have also fallen on Sundays and the 16th would have been a weekly Sabbath.  That's an interesting observation but I wouldn't read anything profound into it.

Update October 28th 2016:  Lunar Sabbath supports have often sought to say the synchronized week goes back to Babylonian Paganism.  But it was actually Mesopotamians who used a Lunar cycle to determine their days of Rest.  As discussed (with an Anti-Judeo Christian bias) on the Wikipedia pages for Week and Sabbath.  We however don't need a Sumerian origin for the word Sabbath, it comes from Sheba, the Hebrew word for Seven.

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Are the Woman of Revelation 12 and the Woman of Revelation 17 possibly the same Woman?

I know that's a controversial suggestion, if true it probably invalidates one or the other of two theories on Bible Prophecy I've advocated on this Blog (the Wilderness of Revelation 12 being Mt Sinai, or the Babylon of 17 being East of the Euphrates), maybe both given other factors.

If true it would prove Mystery Babylon is Israel in a Rebellious state before her ultimate salvation, as I'm unshakable on The Woman of 12 being Israel and The Church being The Man-Child.  But it would NOT prove Jerusalem, rather it contradicts it, this is Israel after fleeing.  (So either way this Babylon is still probably East of the Jordan.)

We often see the Wildness refuge of Revelation 12 as a repeat of the Exodus-Deuteronomy wandering, Israel fell into Idolatry then too.  And in DeMille's movie The Ten Commandments, he draws on Revelation 17 imagery in depicting the Golden Calf incident.

Now, here is the first clue that lead me to consider this possibility.

The word "Wilderness" is used in the Book of Revelation three times, in the Greek it's also the same word all three times, even the same form of the word (Eremon rather then Eremos).  In Revelation 12 verses 6 and 14 it refers to the place where The Woman is taken to be protected.  But then in Chapter 17 verse 3, John is taken to The Wilderness to see a Woman sitting on a Beast.  And all three seem to use the definite article, The Wilderness, not a wilderness.

That I noticed months ago really, it kept sticking in my head but I felt it's conflict with my other theories and how they fit together meant I shouldn't read too much into it.

Then today I was for a completely different theory I've been working on, studying various usages of Hebrew words for Spear/Lance/Javelin.  And I happened to notice something profound in Jeremiah, aspects of this have probably been used by Babylon is Jerusalem theorists before, but I doubt they noticed the Revelation 12 relevance.

Jeremiah 6:23 and 50:42 are saying almost the exact same thing.  In Hebrew it's more similar then in the KJV as there Lance and Spear are the same word.  The only difference is one is the Daughter of Zion and the other the Daughter of Babylon.

And in both cases the verses right before and after are also profoundly similar.  Jeremiah 6:24 is part of the reason we know the Woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, but we overlook Jeremiah 50:43 using the same term.  And in 6:22/50:41, could the Kings of this "northern" nation be the 10 Kings of Revelation 17?  And the King of Babylon either The Antichrist or a Decoy Antichrist, claiming to be Messiah Ben-Joseph and/or the Imam Mahdi?

Now the problem with using this to prove Babylon is Jerusalem is that Jeremiah 6 read from the beginning makes clear the Children of Zion have already fled The Land.  While Jeremiah 50 and 51 is repeatedly tied to the Land of the Chaledeans and of Babylon.  And God calls his faithful people to leave.

Could the "Mountains" Jesus told the people to flee to after the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24 be the Seven Mountains?

Chuck Missler likes to talk about the Woman of Revelation 17 boasting that she is not "widowed and divorced" as a contrast to Israel, described by The Prophets as widowed and divorced.  But others have interpreted that "boast" as being a denial.

And then there is Zachariah 5.  We've long speculated that Woman is the Revelation 17 Woman.  But she's transported with parallel wing imagery to Revelation 12 which we overlook.  And in Daniel 7 the Lion representing Babylon has Eagle's Wings which are plucked.

Micah 4:9-10 seem to refer to the Daughter of Zion going to Babylon after travailing in Childbirth.

Returning to what I've argued before that the Woman of Revelation 12 is in a sense Rachel. In Genesis 31, after Joseph is born and Jacob leaves Laban's household which I view as a possible type of the birth of the Man-Child and The Rapture in Revelation 12.  Rachel stole Laban's Teraphim idols, and in verses 34 and 35 she sits on them, and claims to Laban she is menstruating to avoid being searched.  What color does that imagery evoke?  Red, the color of Scarlet.  And this incident took place in Gilead interestingly.

 And if you still insist on linking the Woman of Revelation 12 to the constellation Virgo (called Bethulah by Semites) in some fashion.  Isaiah 37:22 refers to a "Virgin Daughter of Zion" (along with 2 Kings 19:21 and Lamentations 2:13) while  Isaiah 47:1 refers to a "Virgin Daughter of Babylon".  The word for Virgin being Bethulah in each of those.

Now if this is true, which previous theory should I consider abandoning?  I don't know, but let's consider some things.

If in any way Israelites fleeing the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD is a type picture of the End Times flight (Jesus uses similar language of both in Luke 21 and Matthew 24) then that doesn't narrow it down.  Because some went to Arabia, like the ancestors of many Arabian Jewish communities and the Lemba.  But also many went to Mesopotamia where there were already Jewish communities in Seleucia, Nisibis, Osroene and a Jewish Kingdom in Adiabene, and in time wrote the Babylonian Talmud.

If you are a fan of The Book of Enoch (which I'm not, but I've studied it), that book does refer to a Seven Mountain formation.  Where this range is supposed to be isn't made clear.  Some theories say Mount Hermon (relevant to other parts of the book) is one of these mountains.  Which is interesting in that... A: the form of Wilderness used in Revelation, Eremon, could also work as a Greek transliteration of Hermon, Eremon is also used of a "Desert Place" near Bethsadia which is near Hermon.  And B: 1 Chronicles 5:23-25 says Seven Families dwelt there, who transgressed the law and went a whoring after foreign gods.

But another theory proposed is that the Seven Mountains of Enoch are to the South not North, and possibly one of the Seven is Sinai.  Sinai did have other mountains near it, like Mount Hor where Aaron was buried, and there is some dispute on if Horeb is the same Mountain or near it.  And Mount Seir is often refereed to as if it's close by.  And there is a Mount Paran.  And Mt Sin also.

Independent of all this many aren't convinced by my argument that the references to the Euphrates in Revelation proves Babylon must be East of it and with the Kings of The East.  Maybe they're right and I'm jumping to conclusions.

And another detail of Revelation 17 I've overlooked in expressing my past theories is that strictly speaking it is only the 10 Horns described as hating the woman and seeking to destroy her, not the 8th King himself directly.   So again all of those could be more complicated then we're prepared for.

On the other hand.  Jeremiah 6 begins by talking about Benjamin specifically, the Prophecy began sooner, but still, it's interesting given my Argument that in a sense the Woman of Revelation 12 is Rachel.  And I have an argument for linking Modern Israel to Saul typologicallyEsther talking about Jews who didn't return to Judea but stayed in the east, is centrally a Benjamite family, descended from the Kinsman of Saul whom David spared.  Hilel The Elder was also a prominent Benjamite born in Mesopotamia.  The families who sinned in Hermon I mentioned before were of Eastern Manasseh who were deported by Assyria.  Could it be the Shiites are descended from Joseph (and many Jews of the region from Benjamin), while the Kurds are a product of a mingling of the Medes and Naphtali?

People like to use Micah 2:12 as evidence Israel's wilderness dwelling will be in Bozrah of Edom.  I criticized that in my Sinai post by pointing out the lack of any other Edom references here, and other places are called Bozrah like in Moab, and that it means "sheep fold" and the context here reflects that.

But in light of this theory it is interesting to note that a name suspiciously similar to Bozrah is Basra, which I've discussed before as possibly being the Babylon of Revelation 17&18.

Or maybe it won't all be in one place, maybe they'll start at Sinai and then wander.  I already said I think the scale of the Numbers wandering was larger then most think it was.  I remain confused on the exact geography of Basra, including which side of the Euphrates it is on.  Maybe they'll wander all of the land I view as allotted to Ishmael.

So the assumption in Mystery Babylon debates has been that she can't be both Israel in rebellion and geographically in Mesopotamia.  But that Assumption I now feel is wrong.

Saturday, October 1, 2016

Yom Teruah is coming up

Nehemia Gordon did a study just recently called "How Yom Teruah became Rosh Hoshanna".  Which is informative.

He also talks about how the sounding of the Jubliee on Yom Kippur was not during the Jubilee year but to announce it was coming in the middle of the 49th Year, a fact I'd already heard, but not from a source as reliable as him.  I find that intriguing on a number of levels.

Overlap that with aspects of my Time of Jacob's Trouble post, and maybe I should leave my Mid-Trib variant view and consider founding a Mid Seventh Year Rapture view.  That would affiliate the Seventh Trumpet and Last Trump of The Rapture with the Jubliee Trumpet, making the end of Revelation 11, all of 12 and start of 13 about Yom Kippur, the rest of 13 and all of 14 and 15 between Yom Kippur and Tabernacles, and the Seven Bowls of God's Wrath poured out on the seven days of Tabernacles, with Haggai 2 supported the 7th Bowls being the 21st of Tishrei.  This would adjust my Fall Feasts hypothesis.

The Seventh Trumpet account mentions God's Temple in Heaven being opened and The Ark of His Covenant being seen.  That kinda fits Yom Kippur.

Then I would really have to change this blog's URL.

There are other factors I still have to consider.  There is already a Pre-Seventh year view, but they're under the false impression that Nehemia is refuting, that Tishrei can begin a year.

I watched awhile ago a Prophecy Club video called The Chronological Order of the Prophecies in The Jubilees.  There is much of this person's views that are clearly wrong, from his supporting the Britam view of the Lost Tribes, to trying to make the 120 years of Genesis 6 point to 6000 years.  But his evidence for a reckoning of the Jubilees that would have the next jubilee year starting in Spring of 2045 AD is compelling.  Here is a still I took regarding the Sabbatical Years.

The view of the 70 Weeks I've been favoring had the Decree of Artaxerxes in Nissan 454 BC putting the 70th week in 30-37 AD.  But many have, using much of the same evidence, argued for the Decree being Nissan of 455 BC, and a 70th Week that is 29-36 AD.  I need to look into that more, but if so that would make both the beginning and ending of the 70 weeks the start of Jubilee years in the above Jubilee model, which makes sense.

I've seen people argue for both 29 and 36 AD Crucifixion models.  For the latter that includes Nikos Kokkinos who's theories I may talk about more in a future post.  My personal bias remains 30 AD for the moment however.  But The Resurrection and Acts 2 Pentecost being Jubilee years has a certain symmetry to it.

This makes the latest Jubilee year to happen Spring 1996-Spring 1997.  And before that 1947-1948 which many see as Biblically significant.  Before that 1898-1899.  Before that 1849-1850.

This model could place the beginning of the 21 year Time of Jacob's Trouble in Spring of 2024 AD.

Or maybe if someone could argue the above proposed Jubilee cycle is off by a year, to make my original 70s Weeks views match up to Jubilees, things would fit better.  Then it would be during a Jubilee year modern Israel was founded.

If I switched to a Mid 7th Year or mid 49th Year Rapture view.  How do I match up the time-frames?  The ministry of the Witnesses and consecration of the Rebuilt Temple would be around the Nissan that would start year 4 of the relevant Sabbatical cycle.  The 42 Months The Beast is allowed to continue would begin about 6 months later.  And the 1260 days The Woman is in the Wilderness would continue 3 years into The Millennium.  Why would that happen?  Who knows, perhaps I'll think of a reason later.

But I will still never accept a Non Chronological view of Revelation.