The two witnesses

[Ahwatukee]

Wait a minute,I didn't say they are the two witnesses in Revelation.
But they are witnesses right? to the younger new generation of the remnant of Joshua's time?

They do represent the two witnesses of Revelation though.Just like the 12 stones they picked up out of the Jordan river represents the future 12 tribes of Israel.
Just like how crossing the Jordan river represents them being baptized.

But if you take this at face value,they just pick up 12 stones for no apparent reason and the fact that they crossed the Jordan during the first harvest of the season was just sheer coincidence.

In another post you said that the two witnesses were not literal men.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Wait a minute,I didn't say they are the two witnesses in Revelation.
But they are witnesses right? to the younger new generation of the remnant of Joshua's time?

They do represent the two witnesses of Revelation though.Just like the 12 stones they picked up out of the Jordan river represents the future 12 tribes of Israel.
Just like how crossing the Jordan river represents them being baptized.

But if you take this at face value,they just pick up 12 stones for no apparent reason and the fact that they crossed the Jordan during the first harvest of the season was just sheer coincidence.

Post #112 - The two witnesses are not actual people, it's the Bible.

 

[Ahwatukee]

What I want to know, is why people totally ignore this all important clue.....

Revelation 11:4
"These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth."

Show me by scripture where 2 flesh and blood men like Moses and Elijah feed the Golden Oil of God's Spirit into the 7 spirits of God, so we might believe 2 flesh and blood men have this power.

I don't have to, because I just listed all the characteristics of the two witnesses and they all point to them as being two literal men.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

Noah also came out of the Ark on the first of the month(first fruits) after the flood (baptism).
Just another sheer coincidence of the Bible to take at face value I guess.

Mose's leading his people out of Egypt also happens on the first of the month.Again you can consider them first fruits,and them crossing the sea a baptism.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

Post #112 - The two witnesses are not actual people, it's the Bible.

It is the Bible.but the chapter of the two witnesses in Revelation speaks of the remnant who prophesy 1,260 days who die and are refused burial.
Like the Apostles before them they are to be witnesses of the scriptures. Jesus that he would be with them to the very end of the age, didn't he?

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

The olive trees and the candlesticks are just symbols representing those two literal prophets, just like the Lamb who has seven eyes and seven horns which represent the seven Spirits of God or the seven stars that are in the right hand of the Lord which represent the seven messengers of the seven churches or the seven heads and ten horns on the dragon, etc., etc., etc.

No doubt they are symbolic, you are starting to see that the book of Revelation is very symbolic now, which is good. But I already gave by the words of God who those 2 witnesses, 2 olive trees, and 2 candlesticks are. So why reject what God said is true here about His Word and Spirit being those 2?

Zechariah 4:1-6 “And the angel that talked with me came again, and waked me, as a man that is wakened out of his sleep. 2 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof:3 And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.4 So I answered and spake to the angel that talked with me, saying, What are these, my lord?5 Then the angel that talked with me answered and said unto me, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
6 Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.”



Those 2 who bear witness in all of God's saints are shown here as well....

1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

I don't have to, because I just listed all the characteristics of the two witnesses and they all point to them as being two literal men.

Again, if you cannot support your views by scripture then it is just more doctrines of men, doctrines based on nothing more than pure speculation and a wild imagination.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

The olive trees and the candlesticks are just symbols representing those two literal prophets, just like the Lamb who has seven eyes and seven horns which represent the seven Spirits of God or the seven stars that are in the right hand of the Lord which represent the seven messengers of the seven churches or the seven heads and ten horns on the dragon, etc., etc., etc.

The seven stars which he holds in his right hand are the seven churches,which are seven spirits.Those who belong to him belong to one of the churches.
I know Which one I belong to.
I also know which church of those who have the spirit of Rahab the prostitute belongs to.
The double edged sword that comes out of his mouth is the scriptures.

 

[Ahwatukee]

No doubt they are symbolic, you are starting to see that the book of Revelation is very symbolic now, which is good. But I already gave by the words of God who those 2 witnesses, 2 olive trees, and 2 candlesticks are. So why reject what God said is true here about His Word and Spirit being those 2

This is a common error. The proper way to read the book of Revelation is just like any other book: If the literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. You don't just go into Revelation and apply symbolism to everything! Obvious symbolism is "a woman clothed with the sun" or "An enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns," that's symbolism. But the problem is people going in and assuming that they need to symbolize something or someone just because it is the book of Revelation. By the way, I just listed all of the characteristics regarding the two witnesses and everyone of them demonstrates that they are two literal men, that is, unless you do what you have, and that is just proclaim them to be symbolic without scripture to back it up.

What your claiming reminds me of the same situation as those who claim that the New Jerusalem isn't a real city, but is symbolic, even with all of the measurements and the descriptions of its walls and gates and all the rest of its details. Again, the burden of proof is on you and that because scripter demonstrates that they are two literal prophets. It is also familiar to what preterists and amils claim regarding the thousand years no being a literal thousand years. And the way they go about proving that is by grabbing an unrelated scripture in Ps.50:10 and applying that formula to Rev.20:1-7.

By the way, the following scripture that you posted is not in any of the original manuscripts. Here is what the scripture actually says:

"For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

 

[Ahwatukee]

The seven stars which he holds in his right hand are the seven churches,which are seven spirits

If I must, I will present the scripture to prove you're wrong:

"The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches"

So, according to the verse above, the seven stars are symbolic representing the seven angels/messengers of the seven churches, while the seven lampstands represent the seven churches themselves. And you're trying to convince me that the two witnesses are not real men, when you can't even get the above verse correct?

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

This is a common error. The proper way to read the book of Revelation is just like any other book: If the literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. You don't just go into Revelation and apply symbolism to everything! Obvious symbolism is "a woman clothed with the sun" or "An enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns," that's symbolism. But the problem is people going in and assuming that they need to symbolize something or someone just because it is the book of Revelation. By the way, I just listed all of the characteristics regarding the two witnesses and everyone of them demonstrates that they are two literal men, that is, unless you do what you have, and that is just proclaim them to be symbolic without scripture to back it up.

What your claiming reminds me of the same situation as those who claim that the New Jerusalem isn't a real city, but is symbolic, even with all of the measurements and the descriptions of its walls and gates and all the rest of its details. Again, the burden of proof is on you and that because scripter demonstrates that they are two literal prophets. It is also familiar to what preterists and amils claim regarding the thousand years no being a literal thousand years. And the way they go about proving that is by grabbing an unrelated scripture in Ps.50:10 and applying that formula to Rev.20:1-7.

By the way, the following scripture that you posted is not in any of the original manuscripts. Here is what the scripture actually says:

"For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Do you take this short verse for face value?
Revelation 14:2
And I heard a sound from heaven like the roar of rushing waters and like a loud peal of thunder.The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Do you take this short verse for face value?
Revelation 14:2
And I heard a sound from heaven like the roar of rushing waters and like a loud peal of thunder.The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps.

Of course, why not? John wrote down exactly what he heard and saw. He's describing the sound of all of the 144,00 playing their harps and singing that new song. Why wouldn't you believe that?

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

If I must, I will present the scripture to prove you're wrong:

"The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches"

So, according to the verse above, the seven stars are symbolic representing the seven angels/messengers of the seven churches, while the seven lampstands represent the seven churches themselves. And you're trying to convince me that the two witnesses are not real men, when you can't even get the above verse correct?[/Q

Oh sorry your right.I mixed up the stars with the lampstands.But you do belong in a church.
What are the seven churches to you?

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

Of course, why not? John wrote down exactly what he heard and saw. He's describing the sound of all of the 144,00 playing their harps and singing that new song. Why wouldn't you believe that?

What about the rushing waters?what is it?
And the peal of thunder?
what about the song of the 144,000 is that just a song? or something like the song of Moses?

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

What about the rushing waters?what is it?
And the peal of thunder?
what about the song of the 144,000 is that just a song? or something like the song of Moses?

Rushing waters,peal of thunder,harpists playing their harps all in one verse.Must be something sufficient.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

The song of Moses was a testimony of those who made it out of Egypt.
The song of the 144,000 is the testimony of the scriptures,that only they know.
The rushing waters is for those who are thirsty for spiritual knowledge of the scriptures.
The thunder is the voice of God.
It 'thundered' when Moses was with God and it scared the rest of the Israelite's.
It also 'thundered when Jesus asked God to glorify his name(God).He said I have glorifed it and i'll glorify it again.
Theres more verse that back up that it is the voice of God.

 

[tanakh]

The two witnesses are not actual people,it's the Bible.
With the 144,000 being his witnesses of the scriptures they hold the testimony of the two witnesses(scripture knowledge)
Jesus will lead by pouring his Spirit into the remnant and give his testimony word for word.

That way it will be just as before when the old covenant was being fulfilled.
Ark of the testimony leading the way into the Jordan/Jesus leading the way by being in the temple of the 144,000 giving his testimony.

The next generation of Israelite's and the two witnesses Joshua/Caleb and the two spies are the remnant of Israel in the book of Joshua.
They even made it over the Jordan during the first harvest of the season,so they are considered to be the first fruits also.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-10
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again,
there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there any thing which one can say,
"look this is something new"?
It was here already long ago;
it was here before our time.

This seems to be your own interpretation of Scripture. I think we should agree to differ on this subject.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

The proper way to read the book of Revelation is just like any other book: If the literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. You don't just go into Revelation and apply symbolism to everything!

By the way, the following scripture that you posted is not in any of the original manuscripts.

You speak nonsense. The best way to interpret scripture is by comparing the spiritual things in scripture with scripture by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I gave scriptural proof and support to show who the 2 Olive trees and 2 Candlesticks are, but you just give your own opinion, making no connection with the 2 Olive trees and 2 Candlesticks. Like you also did in that other post concerning the mark of the man/beast, just mans theories and opinions but with no scripture to back up that false doctrine. Same with a 7 year tribulation, all opinion with no scriptural proof.

Are we to take your opinion over what the scriptures prove? LOL And the scriptures I posted is in my Bible, maybe not yours, because you seem to just go on opinion and theory, not scripture. And do you have the original manuscripts to make that call, or is that also your opinion based on what some other man has told you? And the scriptures I posted are true, so your straw man excuse about you knowing what was in the original manuscripts is mute and does not disprove the scriptures I posted.

 

[Lifted_by_the_word]

This seems to be your own interpretation of Scripture. I think we should agree to differ on this subject.

This is actually what the Lord had revealed to me years back when I was not religious at all with limited Bible knowledge from childhood .
He showed me these connections between the fulfilling of the old covenant with the fulfilling of the new one.

 

[Timeline]

The two witnesses are not actual people,it's the Bible.
With the 144,000 being his witnesses of the scriptures they hold the testimony of the two witnesses(scripture knowledge)
Jesus will lead by pouring his Spirit into the remnant and give his testimony word for word.

That way it will be just as before when the old covenant was being fulfilled.
Ark of the testimony leading the way into the Jordan/Jesus leading the way by being in the temple of the 144,000 giving his testimony.

The next generation of Israelite's and the two witnesses Joshua/Caleb and the two spies are the remnant of Israel in the book of Joshua.
They even made it over the Jordan during the first harvest of the season,so they are considered to be the first fruits also.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-10
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again,
there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there any thing which one can say,
"look this is something new"?
It was here already long ago;
it was here before our time.

I don't believe that you are very far off, except I would say it's the Word, instead of "the Bible". While I do know that the Bible is the Word of God, I believe that the idea would be more accurately conveyed by using "Word".

I find it interesting that you point out two (Joshua and Caleb), among twelve, as being the witnesses upon entering Canaan, but deny that the two witnesses of Revelation are real men.

As I have said before, Elijah and Moses make good candidates.

And I don't feel that it should be necessary to mention that Jesus said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; [SUP]12 [/SUP]but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” (Matt 17:11-12). I have frequently wondered if Jesus was indeed saying that Elijah was coming again (after John the Baptist) or if Jesus was just quoting the OT. Nevertheless, "... if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.


I believe that you are on the right track regarding the Law and the Spirit, but I believe these are represented by actual men - most likely two of "The Twelve".