I was watching this Sermon of Peter Hiett.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3NX-XG6dgA
Now he and I don't agree on Revelation, he isn't a Futurist so he's not likely to agree with the title of this post. But he and I agree on the subject of Universal Salvation and because of that common ground I'm still able to gain many spiritual insights watching his Sermons.
Technically this Sermon may not actually say anything to help what I'm arguing here at all. But it was on the Wedding Banquette parable from Matthew 22 so it had me thinking about this subject. And it brought up what I'd already heard before of Jewish Wedding Feasts sometimes lasting seven days.
In the context of what I've argued about The Bride of Christ, and my conviction that the Seven Years that Revelation 6-19 will play out over Nisan-Nisan years, including suggesting Jesus will have a second Triumphal Entry in the Nisan that ends this time period. It has me thinking about the Wedding Feast being the Seven Days of Unleavened bread.
We tend to think Revelation 19 is placing The Wedding Feast in heaven, including me talking about this subject in the past. But it doesn't say that, verses 7-9 say the time for the Wedding is come, then in verse 11 Heaven is opened and the Rider on the White Horse invades The Earth. And in verse 14 the armies following him are dressed the same as the Bride in verse 8.
This suggestion can be interesting to compare to me is The Rider on The White Horse someone other then Jesus theory. Especially since The Son of Man already came riding on a Cloud back in Chapter 14.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
Jacob Fathered Two Sets of Twins
Read Genesis 29 and 30 carefully and you'll notice most of the time each child's birth is preceded by an account of that child's conception. But Chapter 30 has two exceptions to this, Asher in verses 12-13 and Dinah in verse 21.
Now with Dinah it's tempting to say the patriarchal bias of the culture was less interested in detailing her birth, but why record her birth at all given I feel there is later evidence she wasn't Jacob's only daughter? It could be because she's important later to chapter 34 but David's daughter Tamar didn't need a prior account of her birth.
So I think Gad and Asher the sons of Zilpah were twins, and later so were Zebulun and Dinah who were borne by Leah.
Why not detail their twin births the way Jacob and Esau or Pharez and Zarah were? Those are narratives about issues complicating who would qualify as the first born. None of these were eligible to be a paternal first born. With Zebuln and Dinah we're dealing with possibly Leah's last children, and Zilpah's were going to be kind of counted among Leah's so wouldn't have likely had even a Maternal first born status. The significance of being a Maternal firstborn isn't about any kind of inheritance. And regardless if there was no ambiguity on who came out first it wasn't an issue.
Similar logic to what I just argued can be used to say Cain and Abel were twins. Which of course is a claim that gets used by Serpent Seed theorists but with the intent of saying they didn't have the same father. The text of Genesis 4:1-2 is if anything the opposite of them on who was definitely fathered by Adam, it directly attributed Cain to Adam more then it does Abel. I'm certain Abel was also Adam's son however. I've already refuted the Two Seedline theory.
The births of Joseph's sons, Manasseh and Ephraim are not recorded in a similar manner to these two chapters at all.
Apparently the odds of conceiving twins if you are a twin yourself are not higher for identical twins but are for fraternal twins. Jacob we know was a Fraternal Twin. And some rabbinic traditions suggest Leah and Rachel were also twins.
When Mazzaroth theorists are trying to align the Zodiac constellations to the Tribes of Israel, different models get proposed.
The first version I stumbled upon identified Levi and Simeon with Gemini not because of any evidence they were twins but because their role in Genesis 34 can be compared to Castor and Pollux killing Theseus over his abduction of Helen, and because of that incident Levi and Simeon are grouped together in Genesis 49, and Levi had no land allotment or camp surrounding the Tabernacle since Levi had The Tabernacle itself (and Simeon is mysteriously absent from Deuteronomy 33). If it's Dinah who was a twin that would be interesting, given how Helen is said to be a twin of Clytemnestra. I have argued for possibly linking Clytemnestra to Athaliah who was a daughter of the house of Omri. The Tribal identity of the Omrids is never clearly stated in Scripture, but Jezreel was in land originally allotted to Issachar who's often grouped with Zebulun. Also Omri first appears in the narrative as an army commander of the Issacharite House of Baasha.
I have not seen a version make any of the three sons I have argued could be Twins the Gemini, it seems sometimes Benjamin is Gemeni which I don't get at all.
Now with Dinah it's tempting to say the patriarchal bias of the culture was less interested in detailing her birth, but why record her birth at all given I feel there is later evidence she wasn't Jacob's only daughter? It could be because she's important later to chapter 34 but David's daughter Tamar didn't need a prior account of her birth.
So I think Gad and Asher the sons of Zilpah were twins, and later so were Zebulun and Dinah who were borne by Leah.
Why not detail their twin births the way Jacob and Esau or Pharez and Zarah were? Those are narratives about issues complicating who would qualify as the first born. None of these were eligible to be a paternal first born. With Zebuln and Dinah we're dealing with possibly Leah's last children, and Zilpah's were going to be kind of counted among Leah's so wouldn't have likely had even a Maternal first born status. The significance of being a Maternal firstborn isn't about any kind of inheritance. And regardless if there was no ambiguity on who came out first it wasn't an issue.
Similar logic to what I just argued can be used to say Cain and Abel were twins. Which of course is a claim that gets used by Serpent Seed theorists but with the intent of saying they didn't have the same father. The text of Genesis 4:1-2 is if anything the opposite of them on who was definitely fathered by Adam, it directly attributed Cain to Adam more then it does Abel. I'm certain Abel was also Adam's son however. I've already refuted the Two Seedline theory.
The births of Joseph's sons, Manasseh and Ephraim are not recorded in a similar manner to these two chapters at all.
Apparently the odds of conceiving twins if you are a twin yourself are not higher for identical twins but are for fraternal twins. Jacob we know was a Fraternal Twin. And some rabbinic traditions suggest Leah and Rachel were also twins.
When Mazzaroth theorists are trying to align the Zodiac constellations to the Tribes of Israel, different models get proposed.
The first version I stumbled upon identified Levi and Simeon with Gemini not because of any evidence they were twins but because their role in Genesis 34 can be compared to Castor and Pollux killing Theseus over his abduction of Helen, and because of that incident Levi and Simeon are grouped together in Genesis 49, and Levi had no land allotment or camp surrounding the Tabernacle since Levi had The Tabernacle itself (and Simeon is mysteriously absent from Deuteronomy 33). If it's Dinah who was a twin that would be interesting, given how Helen is said to be a twin of Clytemnestra. I have argued for possibly linking Clytemnestra to Athaliah who was a daughter of the house of Omri. The Tribal identity of the Omrids is never clearly stated in Scripture, but Jezreel was in land originally allotted to Issachar who's often grouped with Zebulun. Also Omri first appears in the narrative as an army commander of the Issacharite House of Baasha.
I have not seen a version make any of the three sons I have argued could be Twins the Gemini, it seems sometimes Benjamin is Gemeni which I don't get at all.
Monday, August 13, 2018
Genesis 24:60 destroys Preterism and Amillennialism.
Or at least many forms of them.
You see I've seen a common argument that all Bible Prophecy must have been fulfilled by 70 AD. And well that's just not workable with this verse.
Another factor to point out about population growth is how both Genesis 48 and Deuteronomy 33 foretell Ephraim to dwarf Manasseh in population. This never happened in the recorded Biblical History of Israel, every census had Manasseh significantly larger in population then Ephraim. These Prophecies clearly expand into the post exile history of the House of Joseph.
You see I've seen a common argument that all Bible Prophecy must have been fulfilled by 70 AD. And well that's just not workable with this verse.
And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her, "Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them."A Thousand Millions is a Billion. The entire world's Population didn't reach even 1 Billion till the 1800s. And Human population tends to reproduce exponentially, meaning it doubles about every 50-70 years, or broadly speaking a generation. Which means there is certainly no way descendants of just Rebekah (Israelites and Edomites) reached at least 2 Billion before 70 AD.
Another factor to point out about population growth is how both Genesis 48 and Deuteronomy 33 foretell Ephraim to dwarf Manasseh in population. This never happened in the recorded Biblical History of Israel, every census had Manasseh significantly larger in population then Ephraim. These Prophecies clearly expand into the post exile history of the House of Joseph.
Sunday, August 5, 2018
The Flood did not Destroy The Earth, it Saved The Earth.
The Last verse of the First Chapter of Genesis.
In the blog post where I explained why I now support a Sethite view of Genesis 6, the last part of it is me emphasizing how Genesis 6 interprets itself and explains the reason for the Flood was the Earth being filled with Violence. Among other things I mentioned Tubal-Cain briefly which I want to elaborate on.
Genesis 4:22.
The word for artificer here is very similar to the Hebrew word usually translated artificer but different, it appears only in this verse. And it has me wondering if this word doesn't refer to persons but to objects and perhaps should be "artifice".
The word for Brass is again similar to other words for Brass but distinct mainly in that it ends with a t/th. The word Iron is the standard Hebrew word for Iron (Daniel uses the Aramaic word in chapters 2 and 7 however). But it's notable that in a few places it's clearly used directly of some type of weapon being translated in the KJV as "ax head".
Genesis 6 verses 11-12 use in the KJV "Corrupt" twice and "Corrupted" once, all three are the same Hebrew word. A Hebrew word that is also translated waste/waster, spoiler, perish, spill and destroy/destroyer/destruction. That means the text is arguably saying The Earth was already destroyed before God even sent The Flood.
Genesis 6:12 is a parallel to what's said at the end of Genesis 1. Except now instead of being "very good" the earth is "Corrupt". I used to read "corrupted his way upon the earth" as referring to God's way, including when I made that Sethite view post last December. But I now realize it's man's way on the earth that has been spoiled or destroyed. The Earth has become Uninhabitable.
Verse 13 uses "destroy" in the KJV but it's in the Hebrew the same word used for Corrupt/Corrupted in verses 11-12. God is saying what Man has done to the Earth, He will do to Man using the Earth.
What God says to Noah is that the End of All flesh is already come, it's already inevitable, Man's Violence has rendered the Earth no longer habitable for organic life. Mankind was already dying off.
The Flood didn't destroy The Earth, it was The Earth's Baptism, it cleansed and purified The Earth of it's corruption. Towards the end of 1st Peter 3 the Flood of Noah seems to be compared to Baptism.
This pretty plain reading of Genesis is not a common interpretation of Genesis. Because in the ancient world men could use violence to destroy each other and other flesh, but not The Earth itself. But we have no clue what the Antediluvian world was like. And today it is possible, the potential to render the Earth uninhabitable totally exists, just watch the historical fiction animated movie Barefoot Gen.
Jesus said in Matthew 24, "as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be". But before that He had said "except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.".
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.The Hebrew word for "good" there also gets translated words like bountiful, prosperity and welfare. I've seen one scholar say that the Hebrew of this verse can be translated as saying the Earth was Good for Man to live in, that it was habitable.
In the blog post where I explained why I now support a Sethite view of Genesis 6, the last part of it is me emphasizing how Genesis 6 interprets itself and explains the reason for the Flood was the Earth being filled with Violence. Among other things I mentioned Tubal-Cain briefly which I want to elaborate on.
Genesis 4:22.
And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.The word translated "instructor" is no where else translated something implying a type of teacher, elsewhere the KJV translated the word sharp, sharpen, sharpeneth and whet in Psalm 7:12 "If he turn not, he will whet his sword; he hath bent his bow, and made it ready." In this context it would be actuate to translate it sharpener.
The word for artificer here is very similar to the Hebrew word usually translated artificer but different, it appears only in this verse. And it has me wondering if this word doesn't refer to persons but to objects and perhaps should be "artifice".
The word for Brass is again similar to other words for Brass but distinct mainly in that it ends with a t/th. The word Iron is the standard Hebrew word for Iron (Daniel uses the Aramaic word in chapters 2 and 7 however). But it's notable that in a few places it's clearly used directly of some type of weapon being translated in the KJV as "ax head".
Genesis 6 verses 11-12 use in the KJV "Corrupt" twice and "Corrupted" once, all three are the same Hebrew word. A Hebrew word that is also translated waste/waster, spoiler, perish, spill and destroy/destroyer/destruction. That means the text is arguably saying The Earth was already destroyed before God even sent The Flood.
Genesis 6:12 is a parallel to what's said at the end of Genesis 1. Except now instead of being "very good" the earth is "Corrupt". I used to read "corrupted his way upon the earth" as referring to God's way, including when I made that Sethite view post last December. But I now realize it's man's way on the earth that has been spoiled or destroyed. The Earth has become Uninhabitable.
Verse 13 uses "destroy" in the KJV but it's in the Hebrew the same word used for Corrupt/Corrupted in verses 11-12. God is saying what Man has done to the Earth, He will do to Man using the Earth.
What God says to Noah is that the End of All flesh is already come, it's already inevitable, Man's Violence has rendered the Earth no longer habitable for organic life. Mankind was already dying off.
The Flood didn't destroy The Earth, it was The Earth's Baptism, it cleansed and purified The Earth of it's corruption. Towards the end of 1st Peter 3 the Flood of Noah seems to be compared to Baptism.
This pretty plain reading of Genesis is not a common interpretation of Genesis. Because in the ancient world men could use violence to destroy each other and other flesh, but not The Earth itself. But we have no clue what the Antediluvian world was like. And today it is possible, the potential to render the Earth uninhabitable totally exists, just watch the historical fiction animated movie Barefoot Gen.
Jesus said in Matthew 24, "as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be". But before that He had said "except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)