TWO OLIVE TREES

Speculation over what those olive trees are in Revelation goes on and on. With a reminder that Revelation is chock full of SYMBOLISM, yet some think it is literal that Moses and Elijah are going to be resurrected to walk around preaching until they are bludgeoned and fall dead .... again.

I offer a different view in that the olive trees represent the witness of the Jews and Gentile believers. Together they represent the church.
The Jew is the cultivated olive.........the Gentiles are the wild olive...grated together in ONE root.

Jeremiah 11
16. The Lord called thy name, A green olive tree, fair, and of goodly fruit: with the noise of a great tumult he hath kindled fire upon it, and the branches of it are broken.
17. For the Lord of hosts, that planted thee, hath pronounced evil against thee, for the evil of the house of Israel and of the house of Judah, which they have done against themselves to provoke me to anger in offering incense unto Baal

Hosea 14
4. I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him.
5. I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon.
6. His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon.


Zechariah 4
12. And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13. And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14. Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Romans 11
13. For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14. If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
15. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16. For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18. Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21. For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
25. For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
14. Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Since those metaphorical olive trees are specifically called "prophets", your interpretation fails. Since they are also killed, resurrected, and raptured, you are delving in the realm of fantasy.

....and you are taking it too literally when nearly the entire book is set in symbolism as well as a few other "isms".
Elijah and Moses were prophets and teachers.........so the witnesses will be like them...and suffer for it.

Here is my understanding.

The Bible does not categorically say who they are. So no doctrine can be formed. But the two are revealed in prophecy and it is our privilege to investigate them. There are three indicators in the scene.

1. The meaning of the word "Witness"
2. The miracles performed by them
3. The world religio-political scene at the time

But first we must deal with Moses. One of them cannot be Moses. Hebrews 9:27 says that men die once and the next event is judgment. Since all men are judged alive, Moses would have to (i) be resurrected and (ii) die again from a resurrected body - an impossibility says Luke 20:36. Added to this, there is not a single case of any man dying twice in the whole Bible. Moses died, his body was fought for by Michael, and he appears alive on the mount of Transfiguration with five other living men.

Second, as one poster above has pointed out. If everything else it literal, the Two Witnesses must be literal men.

(1)
The meaning of the Greek word that we render "Witness" is not primarily somebody who preaches what he believes - a common meaning in Christianity. The meaning is the true English meaning that the man or woman WITNESSED something, or some event. The connotation is that the person saw something first-hand and is prepared, on an oath or unto death, to report what they saw. These Two witnesses were WITNESSES of some event, or series of events.

(2) The miracles performed by them were directed, in antiquity, at Egypt and Israel. Egypt was the world power at the time that God freed His people, Israel, to occupy the Good Land. The 42 months of drought happened only once before - at Elijah's time. It was a judgment against Israel for idol worship.

(3) The world at the time of the Two Witnesses has, (i) as its universal king, the Beast in his last three and a half years of supremacy, (ii) the Beast as a universal ansd sovereign GENTILE political leader, and (iii) the Beast as a universal sovereign Religious Leader ensconced in the Temple in Jerusalem with his speaking idol-effigy in the Holy of Holies in "Temple of God" in Jerusalem.
The situation for Israel is that they have (i) embraced a Gentile king - as they requested at Jesus' trial, (ii) allowed a Gentile into the Holy Place of the "Temple of God" (2nd Thess.2:4), and (iii) allowed an idol-effigy to sit in God's place in the Holy of Holies
The situation for the Gentiles is that after 2,000 years of the gospel of Jesus Christ, they bow down to, and take the Mark of allegiance to, a brutal Gentile charismatic leader as their savior.

The question then is, WHO is still alive who witnessed a world-wide Gentile crisis, and WHO is still alive and witnessed Israel's crisis of 42 months for idol worship? Only TWO men are eligible. They are Enoch and Elijah.

1. Enoch saw the world plummet towards the flood that overtook the whole world. At his time, it was before Nimrod's Babylon, and so the whole world was Gentile. Enoch is the only living man to be a witness of the last universal wrath of God. Now, because of the Mark of loyalty to a mere man, universal judgment has fallen on men from the One they should have cast their loyalty upon - Jehovah. Enoch's testimony would be, "YE of the Nations - renounce your loyalty to a a mere man and embrace Jehovah! Do it now, for I have SEEN what happens to the whole earth when they choose man!"
2. Elijah saw Ahab succumb to Jezebel's idolatry and her power over Israel. He slew hundreds of false prophets and stopped the rain on Israel for 42 months. Elijah's testimony would be; "YE of Israel - renounce the imposter-king and his idol! You do break the Covenant of Law and can expect Jehovah's wrath on you! I have seen it already!"

The Two Witnesses do NOT preach the gospel of Christ. The gospel of Christ is a gospel of peace and goodwill. These Two Witness kill their enemies.

The Two Witnesses will be largely unsuccessful in the lives. But in a world that adulates the Beast, their death, resurrection and rapture will have an effect. We read in Revelation 11:13 that, for the first time since the Tribulation started, "...Men gave glory to God". It is most probably here that men started to oppose the Beast and were beheaded (Rev.20:4-6).

As I said above, this is a theory - but a theory based on indicators.

Why not? Do these miracles not pertain to Moses: ...and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will..."? Isn't this exactly what Moses did in Egypt?

And the same can be said for Elijah.

Third paragraph of my posting gives the reason.

I take it that since you state that they are to be revealed you are in the Premill camp. ?

I see how you got to this theory, but...... and its a big but and very convoluted.

It doesn't line up with history and John was writing this warning to the churches that these things be heeded for time is NEAR.
No matter what language "near" is in.....it does not mean 2000+ years later.
Also you can't just dismiss that the bible itself says that the witnesses are two olive trees and two lampstands. (Rev 11:4) each symbolically representing the churches who these witness are, though as usual John was cryptic in his writing less it fall into the hands of the Romans. It seems John is saying that the church as a witness will suffer blood and death before this is over in these coming events (The Jewish rebellion had already been triggered by the Jewish rebels since before Christ was born (63BC), but becoming full on war by 67AD.)

I also have enough evidence to win a case in court on Revelation being written before 67AD.
So then it becomes a matter of finding the symbolism in historty. Easy peasy.

Aren't the two Witnesses the two olive trees mentioned in Zechariah chapter 4?

Thank you for a very measured answer. Just as you acknowledge my arguments, so do I yours. So all I say is;

1. The book is called "Apocalipse" from the Greek "Apokalypsis". It means, "The REVEALING". We both know Whose REVEALING is the theme of the Book - that of Jesus Christ from heaven. And this REVEALING is still future. Our Lord warns four of the seven Churches of His "Coming". So even parts of Chapter 2 and 3 are still future. Almost nothing in the remaining 19 Chapters has been recorded in history. Could we not agree that irrespective of man-made names like "pre-mill", this Book is about events future to this moment?
2. You are correct. A Lampstand is a Church. But which comes first. The seven Lampstands of Revelation or the Seven-Candle Lampstand of the Tabernacle. Is not the "LIGHT" in the foreground and then this light is anchored to the earth secondarily. Is it not also True that our Lord Jesus is the fulfillment of THE Lampstand in the Tabernacle because He is " the LIGHT of the world"? So if Light is the first meaning, can not the Holy Spirit call these two men "Lampstands" without violating the meaning of a Church which gives light. In it is YOUR light" (Matt.5:14-16). Both are correct.
3. I am aware of the temporary popularity of the dating of Revelation around 67 or 68 AD. But after examining the evidence I stay with ca. 96 AD. It is to be noted that those in favor of the earlier date, are mostly Preterists. I do not use that term derogatorily. I just point out that they had to say this to support their position.
4. The main object of Revelation, like any other book of the Canon, is Christ. He has not yet been revealed! The main issue of the Book is future. Would you not say then that the events surrounding it must also be future?
5. It is true that the book has symbolism in it (see 1:1). But symbolism in prophecy is not to be interpreted privately (2nd Pet.1:20). Thus, although history is history, it is neither inspired nor reliable as a means of laying forth God's Word. It is usually written by the victors. Added to this, if you accord symbolism to the Two Witness, you must accord it to the whole text. I do not need to tell you what complications you'll have with that. Just in verse 8 alone you'd have to symbolize "spiritually", and what would then be the meaning if you symbolized the city where our Lord was crucified? And then, would your symbolization of the Beast make sense in every other mention of Him?

But I'm sure you've considered all these before. Take care bro.

Yes, I have been there (premill). Read LIndsay and Hunt, every book they wrote.........big fan.
Then I found some interesting facts and began to explore possible options.
And here I am.

Option 1 an early syriac bible has in the forward to Revelation that it was written by John while a prisoner of Nero
Option 2 Tertullian, in his "Answer to the Jews", a quite lengthy document -he tells them why they had to go through the tribulation.
Option 3 Clements assertion that John was released from Patmos on the death of the tyrant

symbolism, symbolism symbolism........say it 50 times so you can remember it.
I'd explain it to you but you will only get mad if I do.

would seem so to me

I would not recommend Hal Lindsay although I also read him as a young Christian. Pre-Millennialism was the prevailing doctrine of the early Church. After Constantine's marriage of State and Church in 313, Preterism became the fashion. The reason for this is the the once Roman Empire, which had now become the "Holy Roman Empire", needed a doctrine that allowed them to maintain rule on the earth. The doctrine of Pre-Millennialism was always there, but suppressed until the Brethren stood up for it in the early 1800s. Since the Brethren doctrines were an eyesore to both Roman and Reform Churches, there was a lot of controversy about it. Dave Hunt was associated with the Brethren. But very capable men outside the Brethren also established Pre-Millennialism - like G. H. Pember and Robert Govett (books mostly out of print, but could be online as public domain). These men were not only very educated, but they introduce a style and accuracy of dealing with the Word that is seldom found in today's scholars. As you might gather, I started my journey long before the Internet.

Although we are from different camps, I applaud your efforts to establish the truth by reading all opinions. May the Lord lead you to light on these subjects. And may He do the same for me if I have missed anything.

Well said.
What camp are you in?
I have turned to Amillenian.

I believe you would put me in the Pre-Millennialist camp, but I think that Darby and co., made a decisive mistake with the Rapture. Their doctrine was that the whole Church is Raptured before the Great Tribulation. If you go to the current thread on the 144,000, I expounded my view on the Rapture in posting # 2, I believe. That is, ONLY the Overcoming Christians will miss the Great Tribulation by being Raptured before its onset. I do NOT deny a general Rapture, but place it at or near the end of the Great Tribulation. My reason is simple. In Matthew 13 the Lord Himself said that the end of the age, and the gathering of the crops, was a HARVEST. In nature, and in the Bible, the Harvest is divided into three distinct gatherings. It is ONE Harvest, but there is the gathering of the first-ripe, or Firstfruits, then, after more heat and dryness, comes the general harvest, and then the poor and needy may gather the gleanings. It is noteworthy that scripture says that the Farmer (God) wait with eagerness the firstfruits and they go into His house. The general harvest goes into the Barn.

That is, an escape by Rapture of the Great Tribulation, IS CONDITIONAL.

1. Paul calls it the "PRIZE" of the Upward Call (Phil.3)
2. Luke 21.36 says we must be FOUND WORTHY
3. Revelation 3:10 says "BECAUSE" they did that ...
4. The Church at Thessaloniki was nearly a perfect Church (see 1st Thessalonians Chapters 1 and 3)

That Christians pass through the Great Tribulation is evident in

1. Revelation 7. It tates plainly that they who were connected to Christ and His blood passed through the Great Tribulation
2. Revelation 12. Those who have the testimony of Jesus Christ must be on earth during the 1260 days
3. Revelation 13:7. The saints are defeated by the Beast. The Beast is on earth.
4. Revelation 18:4. God's people are involved in Commercial Babylon the Great

AT the harvest the wheat was gathered and the tares were left to be burned up. Most interesting is that the tares were left because the servants might not know the difference between W and T. But the Master did. Same with people......some are wheat and some are tares and only God knows for certain who are His.

My position on the rapture is that those made rightous in Christ will be raised to be with him. The rest are judged (at which time they will know why they perish) and sent to the lake of fire. This comes at the last trump. Last trump means the end, there is no more. (a symbolism people seem not to be familiar with.)

Since my position has the tribulation occuring between 67AD and 70AD, we now living in the millenium await the rapture only. Marantha!!

O.K. I'm familiar with your position. That's in order. There's just one thing you might have missed. In the Parable itself, from verse 24-30, the Tares are burned and the Wheat put in the Master's barn - TWO events. But when our Lord Jesus explained the Parable of the Tares, it ends with THREE events. Here's the text of Matthew 13:40-43;

40 "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this AGE.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

1. In verse 40 we have the fate of the Tares. We also do NOT have the end of the world, but the end of the AGE (lit. Gk. "aion")
2. In verse 41 the Lord then does something IN His Kingdom. Now, to be IN His Kingdom you have to be born again (Jn.3:3-6). So whatever happens now it is not the Tares that are in view, but Christians. The Tares are already dealt with and are not part of the Kingdom
3. In the Parable the Tares were NOT "Offenders". They were "IMPOSTERS". They looked and sounded like Christians, but were COUNTERFEITS. But in verse 41 the angels start a work INSIDE the Kingdom - looking for "offenders INSIDE the Kingdom"! It is no more "counterfeits" but "them that do INIQUITY". It is not a matter of which seed you come from now, but those of the SAME SEED, but who commit iniquity!
4. In verse 43 these "that do iniquity" are CONTRASTED with "the righteous". From the grammar BOTH are Wheat, but one is "iniquitous" and the other is "righteous". BOTH are IN the Kingdom, but one is sinful and one is righteous.

So, we have ...

1. The end of the AGE, not the end of the world
2. Tares who come from a different seed. They are removed and burned FIRST
3. Wheat that is in the Kingdom but which DOES iniquity. They are removed and burned SECOND
4. Wheat that is in the kingdom but which do righteousness. They are a shining testimony and stay in God's presence

If none of this has happened yet, the age is not ended yet. And if the 3.5 years of Tribulation are the last 3.5 years of the age according to Matthew 24:3 and 29-30 then the Great Tribulation has not yet started.

So I'm thinking on this..........give me your scripture for point:
3. wheat "burned second" where does it say the wheat is burned? That is nonsense, the wheat was sown for harvest.
where does it say that tares are wheat?

Tares and wheat look the same, the difference is that Tares produce no fruit. (tares are burned up as fodder)

Let's leave what I said in the cooker and swing to three more cases.
(1)
In Genesis 1:11-12 God made an immutable law - everything that had seed in itself would produce the same KIND. Dogs have puppies, a peach tree will, with its seeds (pips) bring forth a peach tree and a crocodile will never bring forth a python. Now, in John Chapter 12 we have our Lord Jesus as the grain of Wheat. He is a special grain of Wheat because He possesses divine life and human life. At His d death, says John 12, He released a whole lot of other grains of wheat - you and I among them. We possess human life, ad although we are not God, we also possess divine life (2nd Pet.1:4). Jesus brought forth according to what was in Him. This same picture is repeated in John 15. The Stem of the True Vine is Jesus and the branches, which possess the exact same attributes as the Stem, are us. That is, genuine, born again Christians joined to Christ. But what happens if a branch does not bear fruit? There can be no talk that they were false Christians.
(2)
In 1st Corinthians 1:2 Paul tells who he is addressing - Christians - those who, in every place, call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Even the use of the word "our" shows that they are the same as Paul. In Chapter 3, Paul talks about building the Church. He says that we are all builders - all being those of Chapter 1:2. What happens if one of those, who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus, builds with the wrong materials? The answer is in verse 15.
(3)
In 1st Corinthians 5 we have a man, who Paul calls, "a BROTHER" who commits incest. Paul even emphasizes this aspect because he says that we can eat and have fellowship with the UNBELIEVERS, but a BROTHER in the Lord is to be commended to Satan for the destruction of his flesh! Why? Because man is the Temple of God and God dwells in the man's spirit. So what death does is that is divides the spirit from the body (Jas.2:26). So that the sin of the BROTHER in the Lord does not go from the flesh to the spirit, where the Spirit of God lives, the man is killed.

Now, we can have whatever sentiments we want, but these three cases show judgement and "FIRE" for Christians. If you agree, then what I said about the Wheat and the Tares is just the fourth example. You and I both know Christians who are slothful and sinful. The sin and the sloth does not change that fact that we are WHEAT.

Christians: wheat, sheep, good soil, et all........symbolism is not lost on me. I don't need a road map.
Christians do not build with wrong materials.......it is the Holy Spirit in us that teaches, convicts, comforts et all......and God has prepared ALL my good works that I SHOULD walk in them. Eph 2:10 God gives us the materials. Those who fail got their materials from the world. Some people talk the talk but they were never OF US.

1 JOHN 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that [a]it would be evident that they all are not of us

Need I remind you that scripture picking is the road to apostasy

ok...this takes care of these latest posts.......now give the scripture where you said the wheat is burned.
I don't know why you think you have to talk down to me.....its rather insulting. I was re-born...but not yesterday.