TaZ's Whateverology

There's nothing wrong with the God of the Old Testament!

2024-10-22T07:42:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

There are sufficient historical/scriptural evidences to prove that most of the atrocities attributed to Jehovah were not committed by him.

Isaiah 34 and 63 and Malachi 1 talk about the destruction of Edom and says Jehovah did it. Historically, it was done by Babylonians and Nabateans.

Isaiah 19 talks about Jehovah causing havoc in Egypt, but Isaiah 20 makes it clear that it was done by Sargon, king of Assyria. Historically, it was done by Babylonians, Persians and Assyrians, among many others.

Genesis 19:24 says Jehovah poured sulfur and fire from heaven (as though heaven has a storehouse to keep tonnes of sulfur, a chemical). Genesis 14:10 (I think) says there were slimepits (bitumen) in Siddim valley and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fell in them, giving the indication that the land had seismic and volcanic activities. Sodom and Gomorrah are on the shores of the Dead Sea, where the land is covered by asphalt, bitumen and so on. Remember Abraham seeing the smoke of Sodom ascending like the smoke of a furnace. It's quite likely that there was a volcanic eruption during that time and Jehovah didn't protect the people, because they were evil right from the beginning, well before the incident in Genesis 19. Please read Gen 13:13
.
Haven't you read that Jehovah sold the disobedient Israel to the kings of Mesopotamia and many others? Do you really think Jehovah really SOLD them, like the farmers in my village selling sheep to be slaughtered? It only means that Jehovah didn't raise up leaders to protect them. While they called upon Jehovah, he raised up the likes of Gideon, Samson and Jepthah.

I can go on and on about Jehovah.

Again, coming to Jesus, didn't he proclaim extreme punishment on Judah and Jerusalem? Read the parable of the wedding feast in Matthew 22. Didn't it come to pass, with the greatest and fiercest mutiny and massacre recorded in the Bible? Did God or Jesus directly do it? No, Pharisees, Zealots, Herodians and Sicaris made civil wars and killed the people and each other, provoking Romans to intervene and finish of the nasty scene.

The Jewish - Roman war practically ended with the destruction of Masada, a plateau of which the base is Gomorrah, of Genesis 19 notoriety. Jerusalem was destroyed by fire in 70 AD and Masada in 73 AD.

The lake of fire of Revelation is also called Lake Asphalit (whatever the spelling be), which is the Dead Sea, the site of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Everything ended there, as predicted by Jesus. Neither God nor Jesus did it, it was brought about by people.

Jesus predicted a very violent end for the Jewish economy and religion. Everyone of his hell (Gehenna) pronouncements were against the Jewish religious leaders and not the man on the street. And they had a violent end. I don't see any difference between Jehovah and Jesus.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

The shortest possible refutal of the doctrine of rapture.

2024-02-28T07:05:00.000-08:00

Dear in Christ,

Google for "rapture scriptures" and most of the results would contain "1 Thessalonians 4:15–17" (or 4:13-17). Even while we think of the term it's the same passage that would pop up in our minds.

Let me draw your attention to some of the important points in the passage.

1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Let me list out those points:

trump (trumpet)
the resurrection of the dead.
the destiny of those who remain alive.

In this passage, the destiny of those who remain alive, whenever this event has or had to take place, is to be caught up into the clouds, physically and biologically, and not after they are dead, buried, raised from the dead, and judged. The passage doesn't warrant any change to their status or state once they are caught up in the clouds. (The Greek word translated as "so" in "so shall we ever be with the Lord" is οὕτω, G3779 in Strong's, means "in this manner" or "in this way". It's thought to imply that those who are caught up in the clouds would remain in whichever state they were, forever.)

Though the passage doesn't say that being caught up into the clouds imply that they are being taken to heaven, it's generally believed to be one of the stages of being taken to heaven (akin to one of those stages in the launching of a satellite).

The same event, narrated by the same author, in another epistle.

Now I like to draw your attention to another passage which has all the three points mentioned above.

1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Here in this passage, those who remain alive (who shall not sleep) would be changed. Though the passage doesn't specify as to what they will be changed into, it's generally thought that their physical bodies would be transformed into spirit bodies, like those of the heavenly beings.

Unless it could be proven otherwise, both these passages talk about the same event.

While 1Thess 4:16-17 talk about the coming of Our Lord with the trump of God, 1Cor 15:51-52 talk about the last trump,
Both the passages talk about the resurrection of the dead,
And the destiny of those who remain alive.

The difference is in the destiny of those who remain while the event takes place, the believers in Thessalonica are told that such believers would be caught up in the clouds and would continue to exist in the same form they have been, and those in Corinth are told that they would be changed. [Only two times in the first epistle to Corinthians do the world "cloud" occurs, (1Cor 10:1, 2), but they are nowhere in the vicinity of 1 Corinthians 15^th chapter. So, there's no question of those who are thus changed being caught up into the clouds.]

Given that both these passages talk about the same event, which one of the two (those who remain alive ① would be caught up in the clouds, or ② they would be changed) should take place, literally?

Is it that the faithful in Thessalonica would be caught up in the clouds and those in Corinth would be changed? (Paul hasn't written anything similar to any of the other of the addressees his epistles, to the best of my knowledge. Had he written to them something else as the destiny of those who remain alive, things would have been all the more complex.)

While we don't or even can't know the linguistic and cultural reasons why different versions of the destiny of those who remain alive, we can be sure that neither would take place literally. While I don't want to jump into any kind of conclusions regarding the implications of the terms "caught up together in the clouds" and "changed", I'm sure that you will agree with me that there can't be different destinies for the faithful who remain alive whenever the event in the passage has or had to take place.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Daniel 12ᵗʰ chapter and "The Time of the End"

2023-08-31T06:08:00.003-07:00

Dear in Christ,

In the beginning of the 12ᵗʰ chapter of Daniel we find resurrection, the time of trouble, and the time of the end mentioned. After that we find the narrative about the two men standing on either bank of a river.

One of the two men asks:

"…How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" (Dan 12:6)

To which the other man replies:

"…it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of THE HOLY PEOPLE, all these things shall be finished."(Dan 12:7)

Let's ask ourselves:

Who were THE HOLY PEOPLE according to the Old Testament? ISRAEL (Deu 7:6; 14:2, 21; 26:19; 28:9…)
When was the power of Israel scattered? During 66 to 70 AD; in almost 3½ years (a time, times, and an half). It's undeniable history that the Roman forces besieged Jerusalem, massacred thousands and thousands of people, many more were evicted from there, thousands were captured as slaves, and burnt up Jerusalem during that period.
What are the "these wonders" mentioned in Daniel 12:6? Everything mentioned from the beginning of the chapter, including resurrection of the dead, the time of trouble, and the time of the end. To make it plain, all those should have happened during the period in which the power of Israel was scattered, that is, in 70 AD.

Probably, these are the questions cropping up in your mind:

What would be future of the Jews occupying the land of Palestine?

More than 80% of the so-called Jews settled there are Ashkenazi Jews, they are the descendants of Japheth, son of Gomer, son of Japheth, one of the 3 sons of Noah. (Gen 10:1-3). Genuine Jews (Israelites) are/were the descendants of Shem, who was the son of Noah. There's a large array of fake/duplicate Jews like Sephardic Jews, and Mizrahi Jews, occupying the land of Palestine.

If the resurrection of the dead happened in 70 AD, when will our resurrection be?

Hasn't your resurrection already happened? Don't the scriptures say that it has already happened?

Col 2:12: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
Col 2:13: And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened (past tense) together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses

Eph 2:5: Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Eph 2:6: And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

Isn't it said that "old habits die hard"? Even though the scriptures affirm that we already are raised with Christ and seated with him in the heavenly places, we find it hard to let go of what our carnal minds (Rom 8:6) want us to believe.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Balaam, Job, and Jethro in the Jewish writings.

2022-04-24T10:19:00.003-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Jannes and Jambres and "the Jewish Fables"

While I set out to write this, I’m sure someone will cite the following verse to prove that all the Jewish commentaries are worthless:

Tit 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

In the course of this write up we will see that one of Paul’s statements can’t be interpreted without referring to the Jewish commentaries.

While I base this study on Jewish commentaries, I use discernment not to follow them blindly. As in the case of any religious commentaries, there are heavy biases in Jewish commentaries. While they portray someone who caused harm to Israel, they would club together all the bad characters who lived almost in the same era, and claim that they are all one person. Similarly, when it comes to some of the characters who are generally thought to be good, they would dilute the misdeeds done by such persons.

Recently, as I was trying to figure out the true meaning of a Greek word that has to do with the topic of unknown tongues, I had to study 2Pet 2:15-16 which talks about Balaam. While I was studying about Balaam, I realized that most of the Christian scholars acknowledge that Jannes and Jambres mentioned in 2Tim 3:8 were the sons of Balaam.

2Ti 3:8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

They also acknowledge that the verse is an allusion to Exodus 7:11, 22, where the magicians of Egypt accomplished the miraculous deeds of Moses and Aaron, using their sorceries. Though the verses in Exodus don't mention the names of Jannes and Jambres, it's believed that they were among the magicians and sorcerers of Egypt. These Christian scholars base their interpretations on various Jewish Talmud, Midrash, and traditions.

Going through various Jewish writings, I found that the names of Jannes and Jambres are represented variously, bearing no resemblance to what we get to read in the New Testament. (There's a definite pattern in the derivation of names we get to read in the New Testament, like Miriam in Hebrew became Mariyam in Greek and Mary in English, likewise Jehoshua or Joshua became ιησος [ee-ay-sooce'] in Greek and Jesus in English. Such patterns are conspicuously missing in the case of Jannes and Jambres.)

Here are some of the references to Jannes and Jambres from Jewish writings (please note how their names are spelled in various writings.)

Shemot (tr. Exodus) Rabbah (tr. great) 9:7 (Midrash): "And each man cast his staff." Yohani and Mamreh [two Egyptian sorcerers] said to Moses: 'You have brought grain to Aphri'im [A city with plenty of grain. This is almost the same as the English idiom: taking coal to Newcastle].' [Moses] responded to them: 'To a city of vegetables, take vegetables' [i.e. to impress people, bring what they appreciate]. "And the staff of Aaron swallowed their [the sorcerers'] staffs."
Yalkut (tr. the compilation) Shimoni (tr. of Simeon), (Midrash) 5:173:…He (Pharaoh) feared very much in the presence of them (Moses and Aaron), and said to them: “Go today, and come tomorrow”. And they did as the king told them. And after they went, Pharaoh sent (a messenger) and called Balaam the diviner and Yanim and Yamkhrim his sons, magicians and all the Egyptian craftsmen, and they came to the king.
Midrash Tanchuma, Ki Tisa 19:1: Forty thousand people had assembled to leave Egypt with the Israelites, and among them were two Egyptians named Jannes and Jambres, who had performed magical feats for Pharaoh…(Exo 7:22).

There are many more allusions to Balaam and Jannes and Jambres in the Jewish writings, but, I think the citations above would suffice to prove that Jannes and Jambres were among the magicians in the court of the Pharaoh while Moses and Aaron presented themselves before him, and they were the sons of Balaam.

Balaam has a larger role in the biblical narrative than what we used to think of him.

After going through various Jewish writings I get the feeling that he had lifelong hatred towards Israelites/Jews. And, if he had, there should be a valid reason for it, like, being part of a nation or an ethnicity which feels that it was oppressed by Israelites/Jews. But, unfortunately, we aren't told about the genealogy of Balaam. Every passage that talks about him starts with the statement:

…Balaam ^H1109 the son of Beor ^H1160…(Num 22:5; 24:3, 15; 31:8; Deut 23:4; Jos 13:22; 24:9; Mic 6:5.)

Many do presume that he was a Syrian or an Aramite as he said: "Balak brought me from Aram/Syria" (Num 23:7) or as it is said in Deut 23:4: "…because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee." If bringing or calling someone from a certain place would make them an aboriginal of that place, "I called my son from Egypt" (Hos 11:1) should be about calling an Egyptian, but, we know that it's not the case.

The name "Beor" appears in only one context, unassociated with that of Balaam.

Gen 36:31-32… And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel. And Bela the son of Beor ^H1160 reigned in Edom:...(See also: 1Ch 1:43)

We aren't told about the ancestry of this Beor, as well. All that we get to know is that he was the father of the first king who reigned in Edom.

Most of the Jewish scholars identify this Beor with the father of Balaam. Though we can't ascertain whether this Beor was indeed the father of Balaam, by getting a DNA test done, we can attempt to find out whether this Beor lived in a time frame reasonable enough to be the father of Balaam.

The only means by which we can arrive at the approximate period in which Beor lived is by traversing the ancestry of the king who succeeded Bela, son of Beor.

Gen 36:33 And Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead.

I think it makes sense to think that Bela belonged to the same generation as Zerah, the father of Jobab, his successor.

Gen 36:13 … these are the sons of Reuel; … Zerah…

Beor, father of Bela, should have belonged to the same generation as Reuel.

Gen 36:10 These are the names of Esau's sons;... Reuel…

Now we juxtapose the ancestry of Bela with that of his successor, Jobab, to find out that Beor should have belonged to the same generation as the first generation of Esau.

	Esau	Jacob
Beor	Reuel	Levi
Bela	Zerah	Kohath
Balaam ‽	Jobab	Amram
		Moses

From the Jewish writings l understand that Balaam was in Egypt a few years prior to the birth of Moses, and wasn't less than 20 years old then. From this we can deduce that Balaam belonged to the same generation as Amram, father of Moses, who belonged to the same generation as Jobab. Things are getting close enough to deduce that Balaam could have been born in his father's advanced years.

My point is that Balaam was an Edomite. While going through various Jewish writings it becomes apparent that he held a lifelong enmity towards Israel. He was renowned for his wisdom and shrewdness, right from his early teens. Before his arrival in Egypt, he served as advisor to a few Edomite kings who persistently attacked Egypt, to destroy the Israelites who were sojourners therein.

Hostilities between Edomites and Israelites and Edomite attempts to destroy Israelites in Egypt.

Hostilities between Edomites and Israelites began even while the fathers of both the clans were in their mother's womb. (Gen 25:22). Jacob was tactful enough to avoid a direct conflict with his (technically elder) twin brother. Jacob had to relocate, with his family, to Egypt, in his advanced years.

NOTE: the rest of the narrative is based on various Jewish sources, and, there could be slight variations between their accounts. There are some exaggerations in their narratives, which I discreetly avoid. My goal here is to present a readable and believable narrative.

Upon Jacob's death, Israelites took out a long funeral procession to Canaan, so that his mortal remains could be interred in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre. (Gen 50:1-14). While they reached there, Esau and his children were present at the cave. His children protested claiming that the cave belonged to their father, Esau, and they won't allow anyone else to be buried therein. Though Israelites tried to convince them that the cave was part of the birthright Esau sold to Jacob, they were in no mood to heed to their words. What started out as an argument became a violent fight and one of the sons of Dan (his name was Hushim) killed Esau, in a fit of rage. (See: Sotah 13a: 7, 8, 10)

Israelites returned to Egypt. What ensued was a series of wars waged by Edomites against Egypt, intending to destroy the Israelites sojourning therein. While Joseph was alive, the Egyptian army could drive away attacking Edomite forces, as the Lord was with him.

After Joseph's death, the Egyptian forces were often made to flee from the Edomite forces. During those days it was the Israeli guerrilla forces (consisting of 150 to 600 members) that protected Egypt. Nonetheless, Egyptians looked at Israelites with suspicious eyes. They feared that if Israelite guerrillas are so valorous and if they join ranks with Egypt's enemies, Egyptians will have to flee from their own land. (Exo 1:10)

Schemes to contain the growth of Israeli Population.

What ensued was a series of schemes to keep the Israelites occupied, so that they wouldn't find time to rise up in rebellion against the Egyptians. Another goal they had in their minds was to contain the growth of Israeli population.

Thus it was announced all over the nation that the king intends to fortify Pithom and Raamses, cities in the north of the nation and to construct armories there. (Exo 1:11) They claimed that this measure would ward off Edomite attacks from the north. Those who would join the workforce were offered handsome wages. Since both the cities were close to Goshen, the region occupied by Israelites, a large number of them joined in, along with Egyptians, Midianites, Moabites and Arabs, among others.

For a month or so, things went on smoothly. Then, slowly and gradually, all the non-Israelites were withdrawn from the workforce, while the deadline for the completion of the work remained unchanged. After a few months, payment of wages stopped and Israelites stopped showing up at work. Egyptians raided Israelite homes and forcibly brought men to work.

Despite all these oppressive measures, Israeli population continued to grow and the Egyptians realized that their schemes have fizzled out.

The two Advisors of the king of Egypt.

At that time the king of Egypt had two advisors, let's call them Advisor #1 and Advisor #2.

The king asked Advisor #1 about his advice on containing the Israeli population growth. He suggested that there should be an unamendable legislation which makes it mandatory that all newborn male children of Israelites be killed.

Advisor #2 opposed such an oppressive measure and insisted that bloodshed of innocent children won't do good for the nation.

The king was pleased with the advice given by Advisor #1 and such legislation was enacted. This is narrated in Exo 1:15-21, symbolically. Given that there could have been hundreds of thousands of married Israelite women in their reproductive age in Goshen then, it's quite unlikely that there were only two midwives to attend to them. It's also unlikely that a king would interact with a couple of people pursuing a certain trade, whenever there's legislation that affects everyone who pursues it. Shiphrah, one of the two midwives mentioned in the passage has been identified by almost every Jewish commentator as Jochebed, mother to Aaron, Moses and Miriam. [e.g. Sotah 11b:11]. Anyway, the legislation addressed god-fearing Jewish women who would never kill their own babies. Thus, Advisor #1's advice got fizzled out.

This was the juncture at which Balaam arrived in Egypt.

Prior to his arrival, he spent several years as advisor to a few Edomite kings. He was renowned to be shrewd and wise from a very young age. At first he was the advisor to the king of Africa (that was then the name of the region presently known as Tunisia). The captain of the Tunisian forces then was Zepho, one of the grandsons of Esau. (Gen 36:10, 11). Balaam masterminded the formation of Edomite alliances to wage wars against Egypt, to destroy the Israelites who were sojourners therein. Later on, when Zepho became the king of Kittim (present day Cyprus), Balaam became his advisor. Though he formed Edomite alliances, again, he gave up the plans to attack Egypt as his own divination predicted the defeat of Edomite forces.

It was after the death of Zepho that Balaam decided to relocate himself to Egypt, so that he could attempt to destroy Israelites in Egypt from within, instead of attacking Egypt from outside. The king of Egypt welcomed him as he was a sworn enemy of Israelites.

Another attempt at containing Israeli population growth.

Balaam was appointed as the chief advisor of the king. He started executing his game plan from the word go, and made a prophecy, saying a leader will rise up among the Israelites and free them from Egypt. This was at a time the king of Egypt and his people were in fear of the Israelites and all their schemes to destroy Israelites having fizzled out.

So, the King sought from Balaam, his chief advisor, his advice on how to handle the situation. Balaam advised the king that there should be a legislation to the effect that all the newborn male children of Israelites should be thrown into rivers. (This pleased the king and a legislation was made to that effect. Exo 1:22.) Balaam also suggested that the king should seek the opinions of Advisor #1 and Advisor #2.

Advisor #1 (whose earlier advice had fizzled out) opted not to take a stance, and told the king to do whatever seemed good in his sight.

Advisor #2 opposed the move, citing various instances in the history of Israel to prove that God is with them and He will protect him from its enemies.

The king's wrath was upon Advisor #2, and he had to flee to Midian, where he spent his life as a priest. Years later, when Moses had to flee Egypt, he also reached the same region. One day Moses saw a bunch of shepherds harassing a few girls who were drawing water from a well. He chased away the shepherds and helped the girls. (Apparently, those girls had to face such harassment every day.) While they reached home, earlier than usual, their father, Advisor #2, asked them what made them come home early. They told him about the harassment they had to face and how an Egyptian protected them. Then their father told him that they should have invited the Egyptian home for dinner. (,Exo 2:15-22).

Moses stayed with them and the Advisor #2, Jethro, who was also known as Reuel, gave his daughter Zipporah as wife to him.

Hierarchical Structure of Judiciary

In Exodus 18, we read about Jethro visiting Israelites who were journeying to the land of Canaan, while they were around Sinai. He observed Moses' hard toil in settling issues between the people. He suggested a kind of hierarchical structure of judiciary, so that more people would get justice faster. It pleased Moses and the elders of Israel, and it was implemented. (Exo 18:20-27).

Jethro returned to Midian, but it appears that his son(s) continued with the Israelites. A while later, Hobab, Jethro's son, desired to return to his homeland, but Moses requested to continue with the Israelites so that they could be guides (eyes) in their journey through unfamiliar territories. (Num 10:29-32)

Kenites, the descendants of Jethro, became Scribes

Next we get to hear about the descendants of Jethro, a.k.a Reuel in:

Jdg 1:16 And the children of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm trees (Jericho) with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people.

Though we won't dwell upon how the descendants of Jethro got the title of Kenites, please do note that they were the descendants of Jethro (a.k.a, Reuel) and his son, Hobab. (Many are often confused while reading KJV's mentioning Hobab as the father-in-law of Moses. This is because the Hebrew word for father-in-law, brother-in-law, mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and giving in marriage are same: חָתַן, H2859 in Strong's lexicon.)

The most famous Kenite that we get to read about in the Bible should be Jael, the wife of Heber, a Kenite, who killed Sisera, (the captain of Jabin, the king of Canaan) by driving her tent's nail into his forehead. (Judges, chapters 4 and 5).

The most important and the least understood mention about Kenites is found in:

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes ^H5608 which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

As in the case of most of the Jewish writings, my focus here in this verse is on the fact that the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez were Kenites, descendants of Jethro, a.k.a Reuel, and Hobab.

The Hebrew word translated as “scribes” in this verse is ספרים, plural of ספר, H5608 in Strong’s Lexicon. (Some Hebrew texts available in the public domain have it as H5613.) The word (as seen in 1Ch 2:55) is translated as “scribes” in ‎1Ki 4:3 and Jer 8:8 as well.

Most of the Jewish writings say that these Kenites were made recorders in the Sanhedrin (the supreme judicial and ecclesiastical council of Jews), of which the original idea came from Jethro, their ancestor.

While Herod expanded the temple at Jerusalem, it had wings on either side. Within the southern wing there was a chamber named “the Chamber of Hewn Stone” in which the Sanhedrin used to assemble.

“the Chamber of Hewn Stone”

At the farthest end of the chamber was the seat of the high priest. Standing across him is the person under trial. On either side of the chamber sat the rest of the members of the Sanhedrin. The scribes are seated at the nearest end, with tables and seats to carry out their job. We can safely assume that the role of scribes, in this context, was similar to those of recorders in Anglo-American judicial systems.

The descendants of the Advisor #2, Jethro, a.k.a Reuel, who is called a Midianite, and a Kenite (which Strong’s Lexicon defines as: a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin/Cain) were made to sit in the apex council of the Jews, Sanhedrin, as scribes or recorders. As we learn from the New Testament, scribes occupied the highest echelons of the Jewish society, along with priests, Pharisees, Sadducces, and Herodians. This, according to almost all the Jewish commentaries, was Jehovah’s way of rewarding Jethro, the Advisor #2 of the king of Egypt, for taking a strong stance against the killing of the newborn male children of Israelites.

If Jehovah thus rewarded the Advisor #2, isn’t it likely that the Advisor #1, who, some of the Jewish commentaries say advised the king to make a legislation to ensure all the newborn male children of Israelites be killed, and chose not to take a stance when Balaam advised the king to enact another legislation to ensure that all the newborn male children be thrown into rivers, be suitably rewarded?

Yes, almost all the Jewish writings are unanimous in stating that the Advisor #1 was, indeed, rewarded. He was made to feel the pinch of losing one’s own children and it’s recorded in the Book of Job. Yes, according to almost all the Jewish writings, Job was the Advisor #1.

Sanhedrin 106a:4: (formatting is mine) Three were associates in that counsel, and they are: Balaam, Job, and Yitro.

Balaam, who advised to drown the newborn males, was killed.

Job, who was silent and was reluctant to express his opinion, was sentenced to suffer afflictions.

And Yitro, who fled after he disagreed with that counsel and Pharaoh sought to kill him, his descendants were privileged to sit as scribes in session with the Sanhedrin in the Chamber of Hewn Stone, as it is stated: “And the families of the scribes who dwelt in Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, the Sucathites. These were the Kenites who came of Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab” (I Chr 2:55). And it is written there with regard to the identity of the Kenites: “And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up from the city of the palm trees” (Jdg 1:16).

The most vital question: Did Job's and Moses' lifetimes overlap?

Honestly, I don't have an answer to such a question. The Book of Job ends with the statement:

Job 42:16 After this (after all the fortunes were restored to him, and 7 sons and 3 daughters were born to him) lived Job an hundred and forty years, and saw his sons, and his sons' sons, even four generations.

Job 42:17 So Job died, being old and full of days.

Unless his 10 children were born as decuplets (10 babies in one delivery), it should have taken 20-30 years for accomplishing this.

Likewise in the beginning of the book it's told that he had 7 sons and 3 daughters (Job 1:2) and they used to party in his sons' houses (Job 1:4), on a rotational basis, implying they were old enough to stay separately. Since nothing is told about their marital status, or their families perishing, we may assume that they should have been in the age group of 20-30 years. To have 10 children in that age group, Job should have been 50+ years old.

So, Job would have lived long enough (140 + 30 + 50 = 220 years) to have his lifetime overlap with that of Moses who lived for 120 years.

We don't have means of knowing the era in which he was born. Many do resort to the ancestry of Elihu, the young man whose discourse is given in Job 32:6-37:24, to ascertain the time frame in which Job lived. It is said of Elihu:

Job 32:2…Elihu ^H453 the son of Barachel ^H1292 the Buzite ^H940, of the kindred of Ram ^H7410…

There are 2 more persons with the name Elihu mentioned in the Old Testament, one was prophet Samuel's grandfather (1Sa 1:1) and the other was of the tribe of Manasseh (1Ch 12:20).
There are none with the name Barachel mentioned in any other book of the Old Testament.
Strong's Lexicon says Buzite (H940, בּוּזִי, boo-zee) is a derivative of Buz (H938, בּוּז, booz).
- Nahor, Abraham's brother, had a son by the name Buz (Gen 22:21)
  Interestingly, the Hebrew noun עוץ [H5780 in Strong's, pronounced as oots], translated as Uz, everywhere else, is translated as Huz or Hus in Gen 22:21 in many translations, including KJV, YLT, DRB, and MKJV. Though neither the Hebrew nor the Greek text warrants such a special treatment for this noun in this verse. The only reason for this special treatment is that Latin Vulgate has it as Hus in this verse).
  
  Gen 22:21 Huz ^H5780 his firstborn, and Buz ^H938 his brother, and Kemuel the father of Aram ^H758.
  
  It appears to me that the brains behind the aforementioned special treatment didn't want anyone to associate Job from the land of Uz, and Elihu the Buzite with this verse (and as the descendants of Nahor). It's quite likely that they seek to silence an ongoing debate on whether Elihu belonged to the kindred of Aram or Ram (see details below).
- There is one more person, and a place with the same name, (See 1Ch 5:14, and Jer 25:23, respectively).
There're a couple of Rams mentioned in the Old Testament.
- Ram, son of Hezron, who was the son of Judah (Ruth 4:19; 1Ch 2:9. This Ram is mentioned as Aram in Mat 1:3, 4 and Luk 3:33, based on which it is conjectured that the Ram mentioned in Job 32:2 should be read as Aram. From the various editions of the Greek Septuagint available in the public domain, it's hard for us to determine which form of the noun is accurate, and why Matthew and Luke opted for rendering it Aram. Anyway, since when have people started interpreting the Old Testament, written in Hebrew, using Greek versions of proper names?
- Ram, son of Jerahmeel, who was the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:25).

I don't think trying to ascertain the era in which Job lived by traversing the ancestry of Elihu will take us anywhere.

Interestingly, Talmud Bava Batra 15a, makes Job a contemporary of practically every important person in the Bible, from Jacob and Isaac down to the period of Babylonian Exile. At one point it even says this: "איוב לא היה ולא נברא אלא משל היה " (Job never was and never existed, but is only a typical figure). My take on Job is, though there should have been a real person named Job, it's quite likely that the Jewish scholars have clubbed together the deeds and misdeeds of several persons, who lived over different ages.

Job…was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. (Job 1:1)

The strongest objection against Job being the perpetrator of all the wrong doings against Israelites would be verses like the above one, and:

Eze 14:14 Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord GOD. (see also: Eze 14:20)

Now, let's assume that YOU are one tenth as perfect, god-fearing, and upright as Job. Do you expect God would hand you over to a cosmic monster called Satan, to have your hard earned possessions destroyed, your children killed, your body affected with sores all over, and your wife berate your faith? Not having seen many faithfuls who have lost all their fortunes, and family being restored to whatever they have lost, would you believe in a god who would potentially let you to be brought to the state of Job, to have your faithfulness, loyalty, and righteousness tested and proved? Honestly, I won't. My faith in God is limited to His being the savior of the entire human race, not as someone who would potentially put me through untold miseries to prove my faith or whatever.

If it be the will of God, the next post will be on Balaam's Ass.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

1COR 11:10 ISN'T ABOUT THE FALLEN ANGELS. IT'S ABOUT JUDAIZERS.

2021-11-28T18:08:00.000-08:00

Dear in Christ,

There are preachers, priests, and pastors who teach that women are instructed to cover their heads (while in churches, 1Cor 11:10, let's ignore for a moment that the literal translation is "power"), lest the so-called fallen angels would get sexually aroused seeing women's foreheads and hair. (They support their views by linking the passage to Gen 6:2).

My question is: won't the same fallen angels get sexually aroused if women's heads aren't covered while they are at their homes, places of work or marketplaces? If the fallen angels have this issue only while women are at churches, aren't churches dangerous places for women? What if a heavy wind blows and whatever covering women were using are blown away?

THINK: isn't the talk about someone (human beings) who would come to churches? Never ever think that the talk is about men attending the churches getting sexual arousal seeing women's hair or foreheads. The talk needn't be about men or sexual arousal. (I don't know many/any men who will have sexual arousal seeing women's foreheads or hair)

The whole trouble with the verse is with the wrong translation of the Greek word "Angelo's"(G38) in Strong's. Though the primary meaning of the word is "angels", there are situations where the word is translated as messenger. In Matt 11:10 and Mar 1:2, the same word is translated as messenger to say that John the Baptist was the messenger sent before the Lord. In Luke 7:24 the same word is used to describe the men John the Baptist sent to Jesus, asking whether the latter was the one to come.

So, 1Cor 11:10 is about some messengers who would come to the church at Corinth, and they would take offense if women's heads aren't covered. Who they could have been? My best guess is that they were Judaizers, who used to spy on the proceedings at churches.

We read about them in:

Gal 2:4: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to SPY OUT our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:

Paul's epistles, especially, Galatians, is replete with the narratives about the troubles caused Judaizers, "they of the circumcision" and "false brethren".

So, isn't it quite likely that these messengers were spies from Judaizers? I think Paul instructed women to cover their heads to appease these people, so that they won't cause disturbance to the proceedings of the church.

Yes, I could as well be wrong.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

The "this generation" of Mat 24:34; Mar 13:30; and ‎Luk 21:32 ISN'T YOUR (as in a 21ˢᵗ century human being's) generation.

2021-09-14T20:01:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Haven’t you heard your Koine Greek experts saying the phrase “this generation” in Mat 24:34; Mar 13:30; and ‎Luk 21:32 means “YOUR (where you are a human being living in the 21st century) generation” or whichever generation during which they claim the events of those chapters would come to pass?

All the scripture citations in English are from the King James Version
the Greek text used is the Byzantine Text, though any other Greek text won't make any difference.
Strong's Numbers and Robinson's Morphological Codes of only those words relevant to this discussion are retained in the scripture citations.

“This generation” in The Olivet Discourse

Please note the Strong's Numbers for “This” and “generation” in the scriptures cited from KJV, and observe the corresponding Greek words in the Greek Text and their respective Morphological Codes. Also, note that the Greek word for “generation” appears before the word for “This” in the Greek Text.

Mat 24:34: Verily I say unto you, This^G3778 generation^G1074 shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
‎Mat 24:34: αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη παρελθη η γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF εως αν παντα ταυτα γενηται

Mar 13:30: Verily I say unto you, that This^G3778 generation^G1074 shall not pass, till all these things be done.
‎Mar 13:30: αμην λεγω υμιν οτι ου μη παρελθη η γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF μεχρι ου παντα ταυτα γενηται

Luk 21:32: Verily I say unto you, This^G3778 generation^G1074 shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
Luk 21:32: αμην λεγω υμιν οτι ου μη παρελθη η γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF εως αν παντα γενηται

I am sure you have noticed that Greek words for “this” and “generation” have been used in exactly the same form in all the 3 scriptures. If you couldn't, please note their Strong's Numbers and Morphological Codes. Aren't they all alike? (If you couldn't still notice that they are all alike, you may need to magnify the text that appears on your device's display.)

Another passage where these Greek words occur in exactly the same order and form.

Mar 8:12: And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this^G3778 generation^G1074 seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation. ‎
Mar 8:12: και αναστεναξας τω πνευματι αυτου λεγει τι η γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF σημειον επιζητει αμην λεγω υμιν ει δοθησεται τη γενεα ταυτη σημειον
Luk 11:29: And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This^G3778 is an evil generation^G1074: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.
Luk 11:29: των δε οχλων επαθροιζομενων ηρξατο λεγειν η γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF πονηρα εστιν σημειον επιζητει και σημειον ου δοθησεται αυτη ει μη το σημειον ιωνα του προφητου

Robinson's Morphological Codes
	N-NSF	D-NSF
Part of Speech	Noun	Demonstrative pronoun
Case	Nominative (subject; predicate nominative)	Nominative (subject; predicate nominative)
Number	Singular	Singular
Gender	Feminine	Feminine
Though “demonstrative pronouns” can represent things near or far in time or distance, αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF in the Greek Texts of the New Testament is NEVER used to represent anything far in distance or time. (For a complete list of verses where this expression is used, see the footnote.

The only sign that would be given to the “This generation” Jesus was mentioning.

Luk 11:29: And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.

While Jesus specified the sign of Jonas (Jonah) in these words:

Mat 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

wasn't He talking about His own death, burial and resurrection after spending 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb? Didn't Jesus specify that this would be a sign to those who asked him for a sign? Were anyone from YOUR (you being a 21ˢᵗ century human being) generation among the scribes and Pharisees who sought a sign from Jesus, 2,000± years ago?

Mat 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.

While Jesus' contemporary scribes and Pharisees sought Him for a sign, is it even remotely likely that Jesus would talk about a sign that would be given to YOUR generation or the generations of your descendants?

If γενεα^G1074 ^N-NSF αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF (“this generation”) in the scriptures about Jonas (Jonah) was talking about Jesus' contemporary generation, which rule of grammar lets the same expression in Mat 24:34; Mar 13:30; and ‎Luk 21:32 to be interpreted as mentioning YOUR (you being a 21ˢᵗ century human being) generation or the generation of some of your descendants' generation?

Irrespective of the views of your Koine Greek experts, Jesus was talking about His contemporary generation.

In Christ,
Tomsan Kattackal.

Verses in which αυτη^G3778 ^D-NSF is used: Mat 9:26; 13:54; 21:42; 22:20, 38; 24:34; 26:8, 12, 13; Mar 1:27; 8:12; 12:11, 16, 30, 31, 43, 44; 13:30; 14:4, 8, 9; Luk 2:2, 36, 37, 38; 4:21; 7:44, 45, 46; 8:9, 11, 42; 11:29; 21:3, 4, 32; 22:53; Joh 1:19; 3:19, 29; 8:4; 11:4; 12:30; 15:12; 17:3; Act 8:26, 32; 9:36; 16:17; 17:19; 21:11; Rom 7:10; 11:27; 1Co 8:9; 9:3; 2Co 1:12; 2:6; 11:10; Eph 3:8; Tit 1:13; Heb 8:10; 10:16; Jas 1:27; 3:15; 1Jn 1:5; 2:25; 3:11, 23; 5:3, 4, 9, 11, 14; 2Jn 1:6; Rev 16:21; 20:5;

"The Heaven and Earth" = the temple at Jerusalem (from Haggai 2)

2020-12-03T10:04:00.000-08:00

Dear in Christ,

The LORD instructed Haggai to ask the leaders and people of Israel:
Hag 2:3 Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do ye see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing? This scripture alludes to the temple that was built by Solomon and destroyed by Babylon.
(The next two verses are words of encouragement for carrying on with the reconstruction that was then in progress.)

Now, get the power of the sixth verse:
Hag 2:6 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; YET ONCE ("once again" in other versions), it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land;
The statement "Once again I will shake the heavens, earth and the sea" implies that the LORD has done it previously! From the context it is abundantly clear that the allusion is to the destruction of the temple at the hands of the king and army of Babylon.

Now, while it is told that the LORD would shake the heavens, earth and the sea, ONCE AGAIN, it becomes abundantly clear that the talk is about repeating what was done previously. This repetition came to pass in 70 AD, when the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed.
In Christ,
Tomsan Kattackal

Let's study the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen again. (Matt 21:33–46)

2020-10-20T14:57:00.002-07:00

Dear in Christ,

The most important thing to be noted is that Jewish religious leaders understood that the parable is about them. (Matt 21:45).

Verses 33 to 36 talk about a landlord planting a vineyard, getting a winepress made and going to a far country. Before leaving, he leased out the vineyard to tenants. (The vineyard is Israel and Judea - Isaiah 5 and the landlord is God)

When the time of the harvest came, he sent his servants to gather the produce. (These servants stand for prophets). The tenants manhandles and murders those servants.

The only option left with the landlord was to send his only son, hoping that the tenants would honor him, at the least. (Obviously, this son is Jesus) - Verse 38.

The tenants, together, kills the son as well. (Verse 39)

At this point in his narrative, Jesus asked his audience as to how the landlord would react when he would come back, and they told him that the landlord would destroy those tenants and let out the vineyard to OTHER tenants. (Obviously, NOT the same Israelites or Jews).

Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22, 23 and tell them:

Did ye never read in the scriptures, THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THE SAME IS BECOME THE HEAD OF THE CORNER: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? (Verse 42).

Whatever be the contextual meaning of this phrase in Psalm 118, here in this verse (Matt 21:42) the REJECTED STONE (I think) is about the OTHER tenants to whom the vineyard would be let out.

Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, THE KINGDOM OF GOD SHALL BE TAKEN FROM YOU (Jews, Israelites), AND GIVEN TO A NATION BRINGING FORTH THE FRUITS THEREOF.

THIS WOULD TAKE PLACE AT THE TIME THE LANDLORD WOULD COME BACK, WHICH EVERY PRETERIST AGREES TO HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN 70 AD. Is there any reasonable way to prove that the landlord would take the Kingdom from Jews/Israelites and give it back to themselves? If that be the case what was the point in taking it from them? (If you were an employer, will you reappoint an employee who was fired for corruption and misconduct? Hope you won't) If the Kingdom (the vineyard) were restored to them, why were they destroyed in 70 AD?

The talk is about taking the Kingdom (Sonship, Sonhood) away from Jews/Israelites and giving it to a mixed populace, consisting the faithful among Jews and everyone from all the nations, tribes, tongues...of the world.

Mat 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. (everyone, irrespective of their ethnicity, accepted as sons or the Kingdom.)
Mat 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (These were the previous tenants, from whom the Kingdom/Sonship was taken away.)

Claiming that this parable isn't presented in the chronological order of events doesn't make sense.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Kingdom of God v/s Kingdom of Heaven and a bunch of "scholarly" nonsense!

2020-10-04T18:29:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Google for "why Matthew used Kingdom of Heaven instead of Kingdom of God" and you will find many "scholarly" analysis on the topic. For example, read this one from R. C. Sproul:

In Matthew’s case, he uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” rather than the terminology “kingdom of God.” He does this not because he has a different view of the meaning or content of the kingdom of God; rather, out of sensitivity to his Jewish readers, he makes common use of what is called periphrasis, a certain type of circumlocution to avoid mentioning the sacred name of God.

Okay, I am not a theologian and I have never stepped inside a college of theology or seminary, but the above statement is plain nonsense.

If the Jewish readers of the Gospel of Matthew are sensitive to the usage of the word "God", why that sensitivity is limited only to the instances; where the word is used in association with "the kingdom"?
There are 55 instances in 46 verses of the Gospel of Matthew where the Greek word for God (G2316 in Strong's lexicon) is used. Why the Jewish readers are not sensitive to these usages?
There are 5 scriptures in which Matthew has used "Kingdom of God" (Mat 6:33; 12:28; 19:24; 21:31; 21:43). Why Jewish readers are not sensitive in these 5 instances?

In fact Matthew has used Kingdom of God and Kingdom of Heaven interchangeably.

Mat 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

No, I don't claim that I have the answers, but it is pretty clear that the scholarly answers are dumb and lame.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Did the scribes corrupt the Law? (Jer 8:8)

2020-09-20T21:13:00.003-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Most of us are guilty of proof texting this scripture to prove that the scribes corrupted the scriptures:

Jer 8:8: How do ye say: We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain.

In the first place, this scripture does not say the scribes corrupted the scriptures, “the scribes” is not the subject of the sentence.

The talk of the context is NOT about the scribes at all, it’s about the people of Jerusalem, for instance, read the preceding verses:

Jer 8:5-7: Why then is this people of Jerusalem slidden back by a perpetual backsliding? They hold fast deceit, they refuse to return. I hearkened and heard, but they spake not aright: no man repented him of his wickedness, saying: What have I done? Everyone turned to his course, as the horse rusheth into the battle. Yea, the stork in the heaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle and the crane and the swallow observe the time of their coming; but my people know not the judgment of the LORD.

Now, read the succeeding verse:

Jer 8:9: The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?

The topic of the context is the arrogance or attitude of the people of Jerusalem. They claim that they have wisdom, as they have the word of the LORD with them, but they, in fact lack wisdom, as they rejected the word of the LORD.

To a people who have rejected the Word, what value is the word?

If you observe Jer 8:8 in an interlinear Bible, you may notice that many words in the verse are superfluous.

Jer 8:8: How^H349 do ye say,^H559 We^H587 are wise,^H2450 and the law^H8451 of the LORD^H3068 is with^H854 us? Lo,^H2009 certainly^H403 in vain^H8267 made^H6213 he <<IT>>; the pen^H5842 of the scribes^H5608 <<IS>> in vain.^H8267

It’s obvious that the translators were clueless about the proceedings and tried their best to accommodate all the Hebrew words present in the Hebrew text. The Jewish Publishing Society version (JPS) sets things right a bit in their translation:

Jer 8:8: How do ye say: 'We are wise, and the Law of the LORD is with us'? Lo, certainly in vain hath wrought the vain pen of the scribes.

The Orthodox Jewish Publishing Society’s rendition makes things pretty clear:

Jer 8:8: How can you say, “We are wise, and we possess the Instruction of the LORD”? Assuredly, for naught has the pen labored, for naught the scribes!

All the efforts put in by the scribes and their pens have gone in vain, because of the lackadaisical attitude of the people of Jerusalem!

Most of the translators of the Bible, over the last 2,000 ± years, weren’t well versed in the grammars of Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek languages and have rendered many scriptures unreadable and meaningless. Adding to that is our practice of taking individual scriptures out of their contexts and hurling them around.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

The God of the Old Testament was neither a warlord nor a violent character.

2020-08-02T21:00:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

After their initial defeat at the hands of David, the Philistines regathered themselves to attack him, again.

When David inquired of the LORD, he said, "You shall not go up; go around to their rear, and come against them opposite the balsam trees. And when you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the balsam trees, then rouse yourself, for then the LORD has gone out before you to strike down the army of the Philistines." (2Sa 5:23-24)

Doesn’t this give the impression that the LORD is the one who strikes down the enemies? If that be so, why should David have taken the trouble of leading an army around to the rear of the enemy at all?

David did as the LORD commanded him, and struck down the Philistines from Geba to Gezer. (2Sa 5:25)

Read the above sentence a few more times. Who is the subject of this sentence? David. Who struck down the Philistines? David. Did the LORD do anything other than suggesting a strategic move he should make?

Even after his initial victory over the Philistines, David had this to say:

"The LORD has burst through my enemies before me like a bursting flood" (2Sa 5:20),

though the LORD didn’t say anything about His going before David and striking down the latter’s enemies.

God fearing men of yore attributed their victories to their God and those who read those ancient texts in a slipshod manner will certainly arrive at wrong conclusions.

If you compare this passage (2Sa 5:17-25) with the parallel narrative in 1Ch 14:8-16, you may notice that the latter narrative uses “God”, instead of “the LORD”, confirming what I have been saying all along: God (Elohim) is a post-exilic term.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Gog, Esther, the “partial fulfillment” of Revelation 20 and Septuagint.

2020-07-15T06:26:00.005-07:00

Dear in Christ,

There are non-futurists (including Preterists) who claim that Revelation 20 was “partially fulfilled” (an oxymoron‽) during the days of Esther, the queen of a Persian king Ahasuerus.

They say Haman the antagonist in the narrative of Esther was, in fact, Gog. They connect Haman to Gog through a convoluted exercise.

Since Esther 3:1 says that Haman was an Agagite, they say that he was a descendant of Agag, the king of the Amalekites, whom Samuel the prophet killed when Saul, the king of Israel, failed to do so. (1Sam 15:8-23). Haman, probably, was a descendant of Agag, though 1Sam 15:8 says that Saul killed all of Agag’s people.
they associate Gog to Agag using a mistranslation in the Septuagint. Though Septuagint renders the proper noun Agag correctly as “Αγαγ” in 1Sam 15:8, 9, 20, 32 and 33, it renders it as “Γωγ” (Gog) in Numbers 24:7, which talks about Agag.
Numbers 24:7 is part of Balaam’s prophecy against Israel, which was coming up from Egypt. The verse says “He [Israel] shall pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted.”
Though many scholars claim that Agag is the title of the kings of the Amalekites, (like the Pharaohs of Egypt or the Tsars of Russia), and the talk is about another Agag, there’s not much to prove such claims. Numbers 24:7 could be (1) part of a corrupt text, (2) an anachronism, (3) or a prophecy about Saul and Agag. Septuagint uses the same “Γωγ” (gog) in Amos 7:1 to mean grasshoppers / locusts. The Hebrew word translated as grasshoppers / locusts here is “גּוֹב” (pronounced as gôb, H1462 in Strong’s). This word occurs one more time in the Old Testament, in Nahum 3:17, where Septuagint renders it as “ἀκρὶς” (pronounced as akrís), which, in fact, means locusts. My point is: you cannot build sound doctrine on the basis of a mistranslation.
Ezekiel was asked to “set thy face against Gog…and prophesy against him” (Eze 38:2). Did Haman exist at the time Ezekiel, the prophet, existed? Quite unlikely, as Haman was an official of Ahasuerus who reigned over Achaemenid Empire between 486 and 465 BC, whereas, Ezekiel lived between 622 and 570 BC (source for both the dates: Wikipedia). I don’t think Ezekiel was asked to set his face against void and prophecy against it. Gog or his descendants existed during the days of Ezekiel. (More of it later).
Gog and Magog, along with the nations were to surround “the beloved city” (Jerusalem) when Satan gathers them from the four quarters of the earth, after satan was freed from the prison when the (symbolic) thousand years are expired (came to an end), not some arbitrary point of time before that. The days of Esther and Haman had nothing to do with the thousand years.
Ezekiel 38 and 39 make it plain that the battle involving Gog, Magog and the other enemies of Israel would take place on the mountains of Israel (Eze 38:8, 21; 39:2, 4) in the land of Israel (Eze 38:9, 16, 18). Has the narrative in Esther anything to do with the land of Israel? (Even the book doesn’t mention Israel, even once).
The proponents of this theory says that Gog had to attack Israel when the land remained unwalled, based on “thou (Gog) shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled VILLAGES; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates…(Eze 38:11). They claim that Nehemiah got the walls of Israel reconstructed. BUT, the book of Nehemiah talks about his getting the walls of Jerusalem reconstructed, not those of the VILLAGES. Is it absolutely necessary that the talk (of Eze 38:11) should be about physical, literal, walls? Their main issue is with “… seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.” (Eze 39:12) They say that this couldn’t have happened circa 70 AD as neither Josephus nor any of the other historians speak about such an event. So they associate the verse to: “But the other Jews that were in the king's provinces gathered themselves together, and stood for their lives, and had rest from their enemies, and slew of their foes seventy and five thousand, but they laid not their hands on the prey,” (Est 9:16). Look at the contradiction, in Eze 39:12, Israelites were burying the bodies of their enemies and in Est 9:16, they didn’t even touch those dead bodies! My question is: do all the cataclysmic events mentioned in prophecies take place literally? (I know that such scholars have convoluted explanations for such contradictions).

These are my primary observations about their theories. I have read only a few of their writings. In my view, by formulating such weak theories, these people aren't doing any great service to Fulfilled Eschatology, they are making futurists to laugh at it, instead.

In the next post we will talk about the identity of Gog...

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

The Bones of Simon Peter.

2020-04-29T07:23:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

[Inspired by an article from Dr. W. A. Criswell, (1909-2002).]

Roman Catholic church's initial claims was that Peter was the bishop of Rome from 33 AD till 67 AD. Later they amended it as 42 AD till 67 AD. They also claim that Peter's tomb and his bones are under the high altar of St. Peter's church in Rome. Let's examine whether this is scripturally plausible.

Let's assume that Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection and ascension happened in 30 AD. Let's also assume that Paul's conversion happened in 33 AD.
Paul tells us that after his conversion he went to Arabia and then returned to Damascus AND AFTER THREE YEARS went up to Jerusalem to meet Peter. (Gal 1:17, 18)
This takes us to 36 AD (33 AD + 3 years). AND PETER IS STILL IN JERUSALEM.
Then, AFTER 14 YEARS he went up to Jerusalem, this time to meet Peter, James and John, the pillars of the church. (Gal 2:1-9).
This takes us to 50 AD (36 AD + 14 years). PETER IS STILL IN JERUSALEM.
The above-mentioned meeting is also known as the JERUSALEM COUNCIL, which is also mentioned in Acts 15. History tells us that the Jerusalem Council took place around 50 AD. PETER IS STILL IN JERUSALEM.

Now, it's the turn of Peter to visit Paul who was in Antioch. (Gal 2:11). We don't know the dates of this visit. We get to read about Paul criticizing Peter about his hypocrisy in Gal 2:11f.

Practically nothing is known about the whereabouts of Peter after 50-51 AD.

If Peter were in fact the bishop of Rome, the epistle to Romans (supposedly) written around 58 AD, makes no mention of Peter. 2 Timothy, (supposedly) written around May 61 AD, says: "Only Luke is with me..." (2Tim 4:11). Isn't it intriguing that Paul doesn't mention Peter, if he were present in Rome?

Peter's own words:

Apparently, 1 Peter was written from Babylon, because Peter says:

1Pe 5:13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you;

It's unlikely that the Babylon mentioned here is a symbol for either Rome, as claimed by Roman Catholic church (it's an own goal) OR Jerusalem, as claimed by some others, because, none of the other places mentioned in the epistle are symbolic. Though this Babylon could be the ancient city on Euphrates, it could also have been a little place called Babylon in Egypt (a military fortress).

If Peter, in fact, were the bishop of Rome, why Rome isn't listed among the recipients of his epistle?

1Pet 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,...

The gap of time between 2 Peter and Jude.

While Peter was writing his second epistle, he knew that it was the time for him to put off his tabernacle, i.e, die. (2Pet 1:13, 14).

He goes on to warn his reader that scoffers, ungodly men and those who walk after their own lusts would appear among them.

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that THERE SHALL COME IN THE LAST DAYS SCOFFERS, walking after their own lusts,.

It's a well known fact that both 2 Peter 2, 3 and Jude detail the same things, albeit with minor differences. Let's see what Jude has to offer:

Jud 1:4 For THERE ARE CERTAIN MEN CREPT IN UNAWARES, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, UNGODLY men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (See also: 2Pet 2:1-3

So, whatever Peter had been cautioning his readers have already come to pass by the time Jude was writing his epistle.

Jude goes on to say:

Jud 1:17 But, beloved, REMEMBER YE THE WORDS WHICH WERE SPOKEN BEFORE OF THE APOSTLES OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST;
Jud 1:18 How that THEY TOLD YOU THERE SHOULD BE MOCKERS (the same Greek word translated as Scoffers in ) IN THE LAST TIME, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

The Greek word translated as Before in Jude 1:17 implies a considerable time gap and not something that occurred a couple of weeks or months ago. (it's translated as " foretold" in Mar 13:23).

So, whatever Peter has foretold (using future tense: "shall come") in 2 Peter 2 and 3 has been fulfilled by the time Jude was writing his epistle.

There are many scholars who say Jude plagiarized Peter's epistle, and some say that Peter plagiarized Jude's epistle. (There are others who say that both plagiarized someone else's work.)

Peter's usage of the term "SHALL COME IN THE LAST DAYS" sounds to imply that he visualized those days to be in his future, whereas Jude's usage of the expression "THERE ARE CERTAIN MEN CREPT IN UNAWARES" (in present or present perfect tense) implies that it was happening then. Apart from the Roman Catholic and Church Fathers' fables, isn't it safe to assume that there could have been 10-20 years gap between the writing of 2 Peter and that of Jude's epistle?

I think it's reasonable to think that Peter died in 50s AD.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

A positive reading of “when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8b)

2020-02-06T12:39:00.003-08:00

Dear in Christ,

When a basketball coach asks his team: “Are we going to win this match or not?” he expects a positive and affirmative answer. He doesn't imply that his team won't/can't win the match. If you were the franchisee of a basketball team, will you ever employ a coach who instills negativity in the players? I don’t think you will.

The question in the title of this post has been interpreted with negative connotations by millions of theologians and preachers over the last two millennia. They claim that Jesus was predicting the apostasy that would set in at the time of his coming. If Jesus were the coach of the basketball team we have mentioned above, he was telling his team that they are destined to fail, even before the team is formed!

Now, let us read the passage in context:

Luke 18:1 And he told them a parable to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart. ⇉ the passage is about the need of persistent prayers and NOT about the end of the world.

Luke 18:2 He said, “In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor respected man. And there was a widow in that city who kept coming to him and saying, ‘Give me justice against my adversary.’ ⇉ the woman has been persistent in prayers.

Luke 18:3 And there was a widow in that city who kept coming to him and saying, 'Give me justice against my adversary.'

Luk 18:4 For a while he refused, but afterward he said to himself, ‘Though I neither fear God nor respect man, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will give her justice, so that she will not beat me down by her continual coming.’” ⇉ God will respond to persistent prayers.

Luke 18:6 And the Lord said, “Hear what the unrighteous judge says.

Luke 18:7 And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them? ⇉ God will respond to persistent prayers.

Luke 18:8 I tell you, he will give justice to them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” ⇉Has the passage anything to do with apostasy at the end times? NO. (The Greek word translated as ‘nevertheless’ in this verse is translated as ‘but’, at many other instances. Either form has not much relevance in the passage. It should be part of usage or language style.)

The point that Jesus is attempting to drive home is: Have you seen the persistence of the old widow? Can I expect the same kind of persistence in faith from you while I come back?

The purpose of the passage is to motivate the followers to be persistent, and not to demotivate them by telling them ‘no matter how hard you try, you are destined to fail’.

Jesus is not a bad basketball coach!

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Revelation 19, Snippet #1: Do you see any warfare here?, I don't.

2020-01-26T15:37:00.002-08:00

Dear in Christ,

Revelation 19, though prima facie, is a simple chapter, has quite a few allusions to the prophetic books like Isaiah and Ezekiel. Instead of presenting you a long winded study on the chapter, I intend to present you small snippets, if it be the will of Our Lord. So, here we go.

Rev 19:11 And I saw HEAVEN opened, and behold a WHITE HORSE; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True (Son of God - Rev 3:14), and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

The passage that follows say nothing about the Son of God coming down to planet earth, still he is in HEAVEN / SKY. He is accompanied by "the armies which were in heaven" (Rev 19:14).

Now we come to:

Rev 19:19 And I saw THE BEAST, and THE KINGS OF THE EARTH, and their armies, gathered together to make war against HIM THAT SAT ON THE HORSE (the Son of God), and against his army.

The passage doesn't say that the beast and the kings of the earth were in the sky or were lifted up to heaven so that they can wage war against the Son of God who was still in HEAVEN / SKY.

Earlier in the chapter it is said that these kings and their armies were mounted on horses (Rev 19:18), So, the warfare narrated here should have taken place when cavalries (troops trained to fight on horseback) had a prominent role to play in it. IS IT EVEN REMOTELY LIKELY THAT AN ARMY OF HORSE MOUNT WARRIORS COULD WAGE A WAR AGAINST THE SON OF GOD, WHO IS STILL IN HEAVEN / SKY? (I don't think such an army would be having missiles in its weaponry.)

The Son of God is the Prince of Peace and not a warlord, and the talk is NOT about Him waging war against the kings of the earth or vice versa.

You will find whatever you look for in the scriptures. I look for peace, the Prince of Peace and the Kingdom of God and I find them.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

1 Corinthians 13 is not about the cessation of the gifts of the Spirit.

2019-10-17T15:19:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

I don't think anyone would disagree with me when I say 1Cor 13:1-7 is all about charity or love. Every commentator, scholar and exegete agrees with me. For some mysterious reason, the rest of the chapter is thought or misinterpreted to be about the cessation of gifts of the Spirit! Let's step through the rest of the chapter.

1Cor 13:8: Charity^[G26] never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

Let's ask ourselves: Isn't this verse about the unfailing nature of love, while compared to the failing nature of prophecies, tongues and knowledge?

1Cor 13:9: FOR^[G1063] we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

Have you noticed that this verse starts with "For", which means "because (of)"? This word connects this verse to the previous one. In other words: knowledge and prophecy fail because we have only partial knowledge and our prophecies aren't perfect and not because of any kind of cessation of gifts.

1Cor 13:10: But when that which is perfect^[G5046] is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

A lot of conjectures have been made on the meaning of the term "perfect is come", some say it is about the second coming of Jesus Christ, some others say it is about the Bible being made available. Though the Greek word translated as "perfect" (τέλειος, teleios, G5046 in Strong's) in this verse is used 19 times in the New Testament, let us examine a few of them.

1Cor 14:20: Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men^[G5046].

(men contrasted to children, adults contrasted to kids.)
Eph 4:13: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect^[G5046] man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

(again, the talk is about being mature, adult)
Heb 5:14: But (contrasted with babes in the previous verse) strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age^[G5046], [even] those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
1Jn 4:18: There is no fear in love; but perfect^[G5046] love^[G26] casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

(Doesn't it talk about mature love? Please note that the Greek word translated as "love", ἀγάπη, agapē, G26 in Strong's, is the same as the one translated as "charity/love", throughout 1Cor 13.)

Dear in Christ, 1Cor 13:10 talks about mature love, contrasted with the immature love (child) mentioned in the succeeding verse.

1Cor 13:11: When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Doesn't the scripture, again, contrast childish ways with the approach of a matured man?

1Cor 13:12: For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Folks have read too much into the words "now" and "then". Most are of the opinion that "now" stands for the present life and "then" for the life to come! Some have explicitly stated that "then" is about heaven! Try applying the same meanings to every occurrence of "now" and "then" throughout the New Testament and you will realize how absurd it would be.

In the context, "now" stands for our present childish ways and "then" for the ways of a matured man, when we attain maturity.

Let me give you an example to make the understanding of the proceedings easier. Let's assume that you are Mr. John Doe (or Ms. Jane Doe, if you please), a preacher, a prophet and a Biblical scholar, rolled into one. I came into contact with you on Facebook and have been interacting with you through the Facebook Messenger. Once you prophesied that my skin disorder would be healed in a week, but it didn't happen. A few times I asked you doubts about some of the scriptures, but your answers didn't convince me. Slowly, and steadily, I was losing all the high regards for you. I would say, I was very childish in my approach.

Days and months passed by, I learned more about you, your struggles to reach where you are and things like that. Now, I started loving you. Once I love you, I ignore your imperfections, failed prophecies and unconvincing answers. None of them matters to me, because, I have matured or grown up in love and I see you, just as I see myself.

1Cor 13:13: And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

This verse has nothing to do with cessation of gifts, it's about the superiority of love over faith and hope.

The proponents of the doctrine of cessationism, have done too much of eisegesis and in their zeal to establish their doctrine missed out on a preposition ("for") in 1Cor 13:9.

The power and working of the Holy Spirit is the very proof of the establishment of the eternal Kingdom of God, and it won't cease:

Mat 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

The problem with Christianity is that we equate gifts with speaking in tongues, miracles and healing, as if they are the only gifts. I haven't heard many talking about the gifts of: the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge and discerning of spirits. (1Cor 12:8, 10). We don't see many desiring these gifts, probably, because these gifts won't make them celebrity preachers and pastors! It's never too late to identify the gifts that we have.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

“The Scripture cannot be broken” - A case against “Hell”

2019-08-22T13:07:00.002-07:00

Dear in Christ,

If rejecting Jesus were one reason that anyone should end up in Christianity's HELL, then Jews who opposed and rejected him and attempted and plotted to kill him several times and finally got him killed, should be the very first bunch of people who should end up there.

What did Moses say about the punishment for those who reject the prophet that God would raise up from among their brethren?

Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I WILL REQUIRE IT OF HIM.

Peter, in his address to his contemporary Jews, clarified this further and said:

Act 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
Act 3:23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, SHALL BE DESTROYED FROM AMONG THE PEOPLE.

Usages like “to be destroyed off from among the people” or “to be cut off from among the people” is the Old Testament usage for killing / executing someone. Consider this passage:

2Ch 24:23 And it came to pass at the end of the year, that the host of Syria came up against him (Joash): and they came to Judah and Jerusalem, and DESTROYED ALL THE PRINCES OF THE PEOPLE FROM AMONG THE PEOPLE, and sent all the spoil of them unto the king of Damascus.

Does it even remotely mean that the army of Syria sent all the princes of Judah to HELL? Not at all! They were killed. That’s all.

[Those who desecrates the Sabbath, engage in incestuous relations, eat unclean food, butcher animals outside the camp and so on were punished with ‘cutting off from among the people’, implying, that they were killed or executed. Exo 31:14; Lev 17:4, 9; 18:29; 19:8; 20:18; 23:29; Num 9:13; 15:30; 19:20.]

Having announced in advance that those who reject their Messiah would be destroyed from among the people, did God amend the punishment to suit Christianity’s hellish doctrine?

So, the punishment that Jews received for rejecting Jesus and getting him killed was to be destroyed from among the people, being massacred in the destruction of Jerusalem and being persecuted in various parts of the Roman Empire. Does that even imply that their spirits are annihilated / extinguished / culled once and for all? Far be it from truth!

We do remember with absolute clarity the occasion where Jesus called the Jewish leaders as the children of the Devil (Joh 8:44), but, do we remember, with equal amount of clarity, Jesus telling the Jewish leaders - who were about to stone him to death - that they are gods?

Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, I said, YE ARE GODS?
Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Joh 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”

IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THEY KILLED HIM OR NOT, THE SCRIPTURE WHICH SAYS THAT THEY ARE GODS CAN’T BE BROKEN.

If an irate Jewish mob, which was about to stone to death the Son of God would remain gods, how much more the man on the street?

Yes, yes, I am aware of the clause “unto whom the word of God came” are gods. Didn’t the word of God (Christ) come in to this world, to save the human race?

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

If John Wesley knew that Matthew 24 is about the destruction of Jerusalem - 70 AD, why your pastor doesn't?

2019-07-13T17:47:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

In this post, I introduce to you the notes of John Wesley (1703-1791), an English cleric and the leader of the Methodist movement. The digital images of these notes can be found on Google Books.

Matt 24:2…There shall not be left here one stone upon another…

John Wesley: This was most punctually fulfilled: for after the temple was burned. Titus the Roman general, ordered the very foundations of it to be dug up; after which the ground on which it stood was ploughed by Turnus Rufus. (This should be about Terentius Rufus, mentioned in Josephus', Wars of the Jews 7:2:1)

Matt 24:5:For many shall come in my name…

John Wesley: First, false Christs, next, false prophets, Ver. 11; at length, both together, Ver. 24. And indeed never did so many impostors appear in the world as a few years before the destruction of Jerusalem; undoubtedly because that was the time wherein the Jews in expected the Messiah.

Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world…

John Wesley: Not universally: this is not done yet: but in general through the several parts of the world, and not only in Judea. And this was done by St. Paul, and the other apostles, before Jerusalem was destroyed. And then shall the end come - of the city and temple. Josephus' "History of the Jewish War" is the best commentary on this chapter. It is a wonderful instance of God's providence, that he, an eyewitness, and one who lived and died Jew, should, especially in so extraordinary manner, be preserved, to transmit to us a collection of important facts, which so exactly illustrate this glorious prophecy, in almost every circumstance.

Matt 24:15: When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation…

John Wesley: Daniel’s term is, "the abomination that maketh desolate," Dan 11:31; that is, the standards of the desolating legions, on which they bear the abominable images of their idols. Standing in the holy place - Not only the temple, and the mountain on which it stood, but the whole city of Jerusalem, and several furlongs of land round about it, were accounted holy; particularly the mount on which our Lord now sat, and on which the Romans afterward planted their ensigns. He that readeth, let him understand - whoever reads that prophecy of Daniel, let him deeply consider it.

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

John Wesley: So the Christians did, and were preserved. It is remarkable, that after the Romans, under Cestius Gallus, made their first advance toward Jerusalem, they suddenly withdrew again, in a most unexpected, and indeed impolitic manner. This the Christians took as a signal to retire, which did, some to Pella, and others to Mount Libanus.

Mat 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

John Wesley: They did so; their flight was in the spring. Neither on the Sabbath on many accounts inconvenient: besides that many would have scrupled to travel far on that day. For the Jews thought it unlawful to walk above two thousand paces (two miles) on the Sabbath day.

Matt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened…

John Wesley: By the taking of Jerusalem sooner than could be expected. No flesh would be saved - the whole nation would be destroyed. But for the elect's sake - that is, for the sake of the Christians.

Matt 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

John Wesley: Our Lord gives this as further reason why they should not hearken to any pretended deliverer. As if he had said: Expect not any deliverer of the Jewish nation; for it is devoted to destruction. It is already before God a dead carcass, which the Roman eagles will soon devour.

Matt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

John Wesley: The expression implies that great part of generation would passed away, but not the whole. Just so it was. For the city and temple were destroyed thirty nine or forty years after.

Just as I was writing this article, a sister from Australia has messaged me telling me that in her 45 years in Protestant churches, she has never heard about the destruction of Jerusalem, which took place 19+ centuries ago. This is true about almost all the Protestants. If the eminent scholars of yester years were aware of the fulfillment of Matthew 24 in the first century, why do our pastors and preachers keep us in dark?

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

1Cor 3:15: Has nothing to do with your having to go through hell to enter heaven.

2019-07-12T17:00:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

1Cor 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Haven't you come across folks who claim that the verse is about one having go through hell to enter heaven? I've. Do you know something? It has nothing to do with the man on the street, that's you and me!

Let's read the previous verse as well.

1Cor 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

Please note the words “built thereupon”. The verse is talking about someone who is into building up something. Going still further up we see the same expression in:

1Cor 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

The talk here's about someone who builds upon the foundation laid by Paul. Going still further up, again, we see the proceedings with much more clarity:

1Cor 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
1Cor 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1Cor 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
1Cor 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

The talk is about Apollos taking up from where Paul left off and continuing to nurture the church. As it's evident from the context, it's about teachers or preachers, and it's not about the man on the street.

A teacher of the gospel has a greater responsibility than a secular teacher, as they deal with the destiny of their students, who are the temple of God, the building the teacher is supposed to build up.

1Co 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

The one who defiles the temple is a false teacher or a bad builder. Bad teachings can drive people away from God and His Christ. A teacher of the gospel is accountable for the spirits of the people entrusted to them by the Lord. (1Cor 3:5)

The entire passage is summarized by James in just one statement:

James 3:1 My brethren, be not many masters (teachers, G1320 in Strong's), knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

1 Corinthians 3 is a deterrent against too many taking up teaching or preaching, just as James 3:1 is. It's not about going through hell to enter heaven. It's word of caution to those who seek to be teachers/preachers.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Dear Futurist:Make your pastor to read the words of Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340) on Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

2019-07-11T10:51:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Most of the futurist preachers haven't studied the writings of the early church fathers or the early church historians. All that they are familiar with is cherry picked passages from them. Here we present the entire 7^th chapter of Book III of Eusebius' Church History.

[Text formatting and verse numbers in brackets are mine.

CHAPTER 7. The Predictions of Christ.

It is fitting to add to these accounts the true prediction of our Savior in which he foretold these very events. His words are as follows:

"Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day; for there shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." [Matt 24:19-21]

The historian [Josephus], reckoning the whole number of the slain, says that eleven hundred thousand persons perished by famine and sword, and that the rest of the rioters and robbers, being betrayed by each other after the taking of the city, were slain. But the tallest of the youths and those that were distinguished for beauty were preserved for the triumph. Of the rest of the multitude, those that were over seventeen years of age were sent as prisoners to labor in the works of Egypt, while still more were scattered through the provinces to meet their death in the theaters by the sword and by beasts. Those under seventeen years of age were carried away to be sold as slaves, and of these alone the number reached ninety thousand.

These things took place in this manner in the second year of the reign of Vespasian, in accordance with the prophecies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who by divine power saw them beforehand as if they were already present, and wept and mourned according to the statement of the holy evangelists, who give the very words which be uttered, when, as if addressing Jerusalem herself, he said:

"If thou hadst known, even thou, in this day, the things which belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a rampart about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee and thy children even with the ground." [Luke 19:42-44]

And then, as if speaking concerning the people, he says,

"For there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." [Luke 21:23-24]

And again:

"When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh." [Luke 21:20]

If anyone compares the words of our Savior with the other accounts of the historian concerning the whole war, how can one fail to wonder, and to admit that the foreknowledge and the prophecy of our Savior were truly divine and marvelously strange. Concerning those calamities, then, that befell the whole Jewish nation after the Savior’s passion and after the words which the multitude of the Jews uttered, when they begged the release of the robber and murderer, but besought that the Prince of Life should be taken from their midst, it is not necessary to add anything to the account of the historian. But it may be proper to mention also those events which exhibited the graciousness of that all-good Providence which held back their destruction full forty years after their crime against Christ, during which time many of the apostles and disciples, and James himself the first bishop there, the one who is called the brother of the Lord, were still alive, and dwelling in Jerusalem itself, remained the surest bulwark of the place. Divine Providence thus still proved itself long-suffering toward them in order to see whether by repentance for what they had done they might obtain pardon and salvation; and in addition to such long-suffering, Providence also furnished wonderful signs of the things which were about to happen to them if they did not repent. Since these matters have been thought worthy of mention by the historian already cited, we cannot do better than to recount them for the benefit of the readers of this work.

Make your preacher / pastor read this, let them know that Preterism is not a new development from the Facebook and YouTube era. Let them stop hiding the truth from you.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Will Calvinists (at least) listen to what John Calvin had to say about Matthew 24:34?

2019-07-10T17:30:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

Here is what John Calvin has stated on Matt 24:34 in John Calvin's On The Harmony Of The Gospels Vol. 3, available on Google Books. [highlighting is mine.]

34. This generation shall not pass away. Though Christ employs a general expression, yet he does not extend the discourses to all the miseries which would befall the Church, but merely informs them, that before a single generation shall have been completed, they will learn by experience the truth of what he has said. For within fifty years the city was destroyed and the temple was razed, the whole country was reduced to a hideous desert, and the obstinacy of the world rose up against God. Nay more, their rage was inflamed to exterminate the doctrine of salvation, false teachers arose to corrupt the pure gospel by their impostures, religion sustained amazing shocks, and the whole company of the godly was miserably distressed. Now though the same evils were perpetrated in uninterrupted succession for many ages afterwards, yet what Christ said was true, that, before the close of a single generation, believers would feel in reality, and by undoubted experience, the truth of his prediction; for the apostles endured the same things which we see in the present day. And yet it was not the design of Christ to promise to his followers that their calamities would be terminated within a short time, (for then he would have contradicted himself, having previously warned them that the end was not yet;) but, in order to encourage them to perseverance, he expressly foretold that those things related to their own age. The meaning therefore is: "This prophecy does not relate to evils that are distant, and which posterity will see after the lapse of many centuries, but which are now hanging over you, and ready to fall in one mass, so that there is no part of it which the present generation will not experience." So then, while our Lord heaps upon a, single generation every kind of calamities, he does not by any means exempt future ages from the same kind of sufferings, but only enjoins the disciples to be prepared for enduring them all with firmness.

Whether you are a Calvinist or not, these are the words of one of the most reputed figures of the Protestant movement, proving your futurist preachers' views on "this generation" (Matt 24:34) wrong!

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

“Christians” isn't a name called by the non-believers (“pagans”) of Antioch!

2019-07-09T04:01:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

There's a popular notion that the disciples of Christ were called by the name “Christians” by the non-believers (they say “pagans”, whatever they mean) of Antioch. They use Acts 11:26 to prove their point. (Please note that the Strong's number for only the relevant word is retained in the scriptures taken from the King James Version.)

Act 11:26: And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called^[G5537] Christians first in Antioch.

Please note that the scripture doesn't say that the people of Antioch called the disciples as “Christians”, it says that the location at which they were called as “Christians” was Antioch. If you are familiar with grammar, the verb “called” is used in its intransitive form (one that doesn't take a direct object).

The Greek word that is translated as “called” in Acts 11:26.

G5537: (χρηματίζω, chrēmatizō, khray-mat-id'-zo); From G5536; to utter an oracle (compare the original sense of G5530), that is, divinely intimate; by implication (compare the secular sense of G5532) to constitute a firm for business, that is, (genitive) bear as a title: - be called, be admonished (warned) of God, reveal, speak.

Please examine the other scriptures in which this word is used:

Mat 2:12: And being warned of God^[G5537] in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.
Mat 2:22: But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God^[G5537] in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
Luke 2:26: And it was revealed^[G5537] unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
Act 10:22: And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God^[G5537] by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
Rom 7:3: So then if, while [her] husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called^[G5537] an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
Heb 8:5: Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God^[G5537] when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

Heb 11:7: By faith Noah, being warned of God^[G5537] of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
Heb 12:25: See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake^[G5537] on earth, much more [shall not] we [escape,] if we turn away from him that [speaketh] from heaven:

Even in those scriptures where the word isn't rendered as “warned of God” or “admonished of God”, it's pretty obvious that the intended meaning was “to proclaim”, “to declare” or “to pronounce”, mostly in intransitive form.

There's nothing in Acts 11:26 to prove that it was the non-Christians of Antioch that called the disciples as
“Christians”. While we examine the above scriptures that uses the same Greek word, it becomes obvious that what happened at Antioch was a divine declaration, revelation or pronouncement.

If “Christian” were a derogatory name, why did Peter use it?

1Pe 4:16: Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

If “Christian” were a derogatory term, Peter could have used some other, more acceptable, term, like “believer”.

I rejoice in being labelled as a “Christian” (a disciple), though I don't have anything to do with any of the flavors of the religion that goes by that name.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Moral of the story: Don't trust everything that scholars tell you and you find on the internet. STUDY yourself.

Satan Myth: On Zionist Biblical Commentaries and the identity of the lion from whose mouth Paul was delivered.

2019-07-06T09:48:00.000-07:00

Dear in Christ,

As I have stated several times, Biblical Commentaries often hide the truth and attempt to absolve the real culprits of their misdeeds.

2 Tim 4:17 Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear: and I WAS DELIVERED OUT OF THE MOUTH OF THE LION."

If you look up various commentaries on this verse, you will come across two types of interpretations:

Paul was thrown in front of the lions in one of the Roman amphitheaters.
Some of the historians have termed Caesars as lions, and hence the talk is about Paul escaping from the wrath of one of the Caesars.

Do you know something? The incident that Paul is alluding here happened years before he set his foot in Rome. Moreover, it's unusual for a Roman citizen to be thrown in front of the lions in a Roman amphitheater.

Have you noticed that the verse starts with a preposition or conjunction (notwithstanding / but)? How often do we start a sentence or statement with a preposition/conjunction? Isn't it obvious that this verse is a continuation of what has been stated previously? So, let's read the previous verse:

2Tim 4:16: "AT MY FIRST ANSWER (^G627, defense) no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge."

So, the Lord delivering Paul from the mouth of the lion occurred in Paul's first defense (the Greek word translated as defense is apologia, G627 in Strong's lexicon).

It can't be just a coincidence that the very first time the word defense (Greek: apologia) has been used in the New Testament is when Paul uttered the word while making his defense in front of the Jewish council!

Acts 22:1: "Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my DEFENSE^G627 which I make now unto you."

Paul arrived in Jerusalem a few days before this defense (Acts 21:15), and was in the temple, accompanying 4 Jewish Christian brethren who were performing their purification rituals, on conclusion of their Nazarite vow. (Acts 21:23-24).

Some of the Jews from Asia Minor laid hands on him, accusing him of bringing Greeks inside the temple. (Acts 21:27-29).

Jews wanted to kill Paul, but the Roman soldiers rescued him and brought him to the chief captain who gave Paul the permission to make his DEFENSE (Acts 21:32-36) and that's the defense we read in Acts 22. (I leave out details of who were those men who forsook Paul - 2Tim 4:16 and how the Lord delivered him, for the sake of brevity.) It was at this occasion that Paul was delivered from the mouth of the lion. There are no amphitheaters or Caesars involved, it was right there in Jerusalem and the lions were Jews.

Do you think that it takes rocket science to connect the first defense of Paul to Acts 22:1? If you don't, why didn't all those great theologians and Biblical scholars of last two millennia didn't connect these passages? The answer, my friend, is fairly simple: they are Zionists who seek to absolve Jews of every kind of wrongdoing.

Moreover, once you realize that the lion intended in 2Tim 4:17 were Jews, you will easily identity "the Devil which moves around like a roaring lion" (1Pet 5:8) also was about the Jews.

Beware of Zionist commentaries!

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Was Jesus really tested by Satan? - a Sequel, the Essene Connection.

2019-07-04T03:17:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

This is a sequel to the series "Was Jesus Really Tested By Satan?"

[This is a very sketchy note and was part of the initial scripts of another work in my own language - Malayalam. I haven't provided much historical data, for the sake of brevity. You are cautioned that this may offend your beliefs, if you have been following some of the fables spread by the mainstream religion.]

We gather from Mat 4:1 that the express purpose of the Spirit leading Jesus into the Judean desert (Mat 3:1) was to be tested by Satan (aka, the Devil).

Mat 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

We know that it's unlikely that Satan has set up stalls in the desert, offering testing services to passers by.

Many scholars and theologians have observed that there are similarities between the requests of “Satan” and the Messianic expectations of Jews.

The first request was to turn a stone to bread, something that's not easily accomplished by an ordinary human being. One of the Messianic expectations is that the Messiah, when he comes, would perform miracles.
The second one was about the Law and the temple, and the Jewish expectation was Messiah would elucidate the Law and build a new temple. (He would reestablish the Law).
The third was about political power, and the Jewish expectation was that the Messiah would reign over all the nations of the world.

The fact that there are similarities between the requests of “Satan” and the Messianic expectations of Jews tells us that there were some folks with similar interests in the desert to which Jesus was led, and the scriptures term His interaction with such folks as "temptation by Satan / the Devil".

We aren't told about the specific location to which Jesus was led. Jesus wasn't far away from Jericho while he was tested:

the place at which he was baptized was Bethany beyond Jordan (John 1:28), close to the ford through which Israel crossed river Jordan while entering the land of Canaan, which is not very far from Jericho.
it is believed that one of the tests occurred on the Mount of Temptation (Quarantania), only a couple of miles northwest of Jericho.
Since one of the tests involved bringing Jesus to the temple at Jerusalem, many scholars opine that He was at a location from which there should have been a road that leads to Jerusalem.

In those days there was a road from Jericho to Jerusalem, the setting of the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-35).
Another place in the desert from which there was a road that leads to Jerusalem was Qumran.

I believe that Jesus was in Qumran.

Jesus has asserted twice that the focus of his earthly was to redeem “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mat 10:6; 15:24).
Jesus, who was on the mission to redeem lost sheep of the house of Israel, told the parable of a man who would leave his 99 sheep and seek out the one that was lost.
During his ministry, he and his disciples proclaimed the gospel of the Kingdom to every one of the Jewish settlements in Judea and Galilee. They also had been to the East Bank of Jordan and Decapolis. They were in Jericho a couple of times.
If Jesus, indeed, were the good shepherd who wouldn't rest till he redeems the lost sheep, it's hard to believe that he didn't preach to the 3-4,000 strong Essene community (a Jewish sect) in Qumran, having come so close to their settlement. (The distance between Bethany beyond Jordan and Qumran is 7.5 kilometers or 4.6 miles).

I believe that the scriptures term Jesus' interactions with Essenes of Qumran as “tempted by Satan/the Devil”.

The first test involved breaking fast, Essenes had various types of fasts and strict rules regarding breaking fasts (like consuming vegan food stuff). [Remember, Jews tempting Jesus several times, asking him to show a sign from heaven and suggesting him to give them bread/Manna from heaven (John 6:30, 31). Probably, Essenes were suggesting such a super human act by turning a stone to bread.].

The second test involved the Law, of which the temple was the visible manifestation. Josephus has written that Essenes where strict adherents of the Law. If Jesus were to jump off from the southwest corner of the court of the temple (termed as "the pinnacle of the temple" in the gospels) into the Kidron valley, 300 to 600 feet below, he would have been dishonoring and desecrating the temple, and thus the Law.

The third test (on the mount) was about political power, which Essenes believed was theirs as they were the Sons of Zadok, who according to Ezekiel have a prominent role in the temple of his vision (Eze 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11).

Essenes dwelled in various parts of the Mediterranean region, but, one of the most important of their settlements was Qumran, not very far from Jericho and Bethany, beyond Jordan, probably, 6-8 miles away from both these places. (Only celibate Essenes and Zadokites stayed in Jerusalem as they wanted to enter the priesthood and also because they believed that they shouldn't have sexual intercourse in the holy city.)

The Essene Quarters of Jerusalem and Mark, the author of the 2^nd gospel.

Coming to the New Testament, Jesus commanded two of his disciples to make preparations for his last Passover and said:

Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him (Mar 14:13). (That man could have been Mark himself, as we read "And in the evening he cometh with the twelve" in Mar 14:17)

Since it was not common among Jewish men to fetch water, this man could have been a celibate Essene. While Jesus commanded this, he was coming from the house of Simon the Leper in Bethany, across Kidron valley, on the way to the Mount of Olives. It is quite likely that Jesus and his disciples would have entered the city through the southwest gate of the city, which was the Essene gate, leading to the Essene quarters of the city, constructed / instituted during the reign of Herod the Great. The “Upper Room”, where Passover, Pentecost and many other events happened was located in the Essene Quarters and it was here that the disciples were hiding before the Pentecost.

It can't be just a coincidence that Mark's Upper Room was in the Essene Quarters and a fragment of the Mark's gospel - 7Q5 - was recovered from one of the caves in the Essene settlement in Qumran.

"Magi" and "sorcerer".

Essenes were men of learning and they had knowledge of astronomy and medicine. It is quite likely that the “wise men” (Magi) who came from the east (Qumran is east to Bethlehem) to worship the newborn Jesus were Essenes, as they came observing the movements of a star. [Magi, G3097 in Strong’s is mistranslated as “wise men” in Matthew 2 and again as "sorcerer" in Acts 13:6, 8.]

Essenes and Zadokites were either waiting for a “Righteous Teacher” or a “Teacher of Righteousness”. They also had their own eschatology and were aware that the Jewish system would end when the Messiah appears on the scene. I believe many among them accepted Jesus as the Messiah as we read in Acts 6:7 that many among the priests also embraced the new way. These, many scholars agree, weren’t Sadducee priests, but were Essene priests. (I believe Pharisees, generally, weren't into priesthood, as they followed Rabbis and not priests.)

Since I mentioned “Magi” above, I believe that Barjesus (who is called as a sorcerer in Acts 13:6 and 8 also was an Essene. We don’t read about any sorcery that he performed, all that he did was to prevail upon Sergius Paulus (the deputy of the country of Paphos in Cyprus) to turn away from the faith in Christ. (In the English translations of the Greek Septuagint, the same Greek word is translated as magicians in the book of Daniel and clearly distinguished from astrologers. (Dan 1:20; 2:2, 10, 27; 4:7; 5:7, 11, 15.; So, they weren’t astrologers or sorcerers.

Conspiracy theorists say that Jesus and John the Baptist were Essenes and they are a secret group which has been in existence since the days of Enoch, the 7^th from Adam. The only evidence they have is the presence of the book of Enoch among the Dead Sea Scrolls, recovered from Qumran. It’s as good as saying that I’m a Muslim, just because I have Quran in my library.

If I am correct, the Bible summarized his encounters with Essenes, symbolically, as “the temptation of Jesus, by Satan”, so, the conspiracy theorists' view can't hold water.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Did Jesus come to bring a sword upon earth? (Matt 10:34-36)

2019-07-04T00:12:00.001-07:00

Dear in Christ,

[Though fairly lengthy, this is a quick note on Matt 10:34-36. Errors and omissions expected]

Don’t think that I’ve come to bring peace to the earth. I haven’t come to bring peace, but a sword! (Matt 10:34-36)

Matt 10:34-36 is one of the New Testament passages very often used by atheists, rationalists and even by some of the Christians who are on the way to become atheists or agnostics, to berate and deride Jesus and the Bible.

When read without considering the sociopolitical unrest that prevailed in Judea, Galilee and the rest of Israel, the passage would sound like what it literally means: Jesus came to bring wars (sword) in the land and rifts in families.

Right from the very beginning of the first century, Jewish society was in total unrest, as they wanted to be free from the rule of the “pagan” Rome. It was in 6 AD that the Roman Empire set up its offices in Judea and other parts of Israel. The administration was carried out through Prefects, Procurators, and Legates. It was almost the same time that insurrections / rebellion started in the land. One of the most notable persons mentioned in the New Testament, in this connection is Judah of Galilee (Acts 5:37), a Zealot. He along with his supporters tried to overthrow the Roman administration. The Roman empire dealt with them with an iron fist and the rebels perished.

During the days of Jesus' ministry, another group of Zealots, again, Galileans plotted to overthrow the Roman administration. The news of the conspiracy fell in the ears of Pontius Pilate, but, he couldn’t have involved in it, as Galilee wasn’t under his jurisdiction. These Galileans came to Jerusalem to observe the Passover and the forces under Pilate massacred them, even while their offerings were in their hands (this, probably, could have been the reason for the misunderstanding between Herod and Pilate - Luke 23:12). Thus we read:

Luke 13:1 There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.

A few decades after the day of the Pentecost, apostasy was spreading among the Hebrew speaking believers in Judea and other parts of Israel. They lost their faith in Jesus coming back and their Messiah liberating them the Roman administration. It is quite normal that they decided to join ranks with the rest of the Jews in their bid to overthrow the Roman administration.

It was at this point, I believe, the epistle to Hebrews was written, to correct them. In the 3ʳᵈ and 4ᵗʰ chapters of the epistle it is narrated how God has been entreating people to enter the rest of God (Sabbath) from time to time, variously and through various messengers. These messages were delivered to them with the earnestness of preaching the gospel. But, alas, they won’t listen, as they neither trust the messengers nor believe in God. (Heb 4:1, 2).

The most outstanding example of people not trusting God as well as His messengers would be the narrative where a group of Israelites deciding to proceed to the land of Canaan on their own (Numbers 14), despite Moses' repeated requests and attempts to discourage them from making such a misadventure. Needless to say, they perished.

After hinting at many such incidents of disobedience, the author of the epistle to Hebrews implores the Hebrew believers to enter into the rest of God, taking lessons from the mistakes or misdeeds of their ancestors. It is in this context it is said:

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

I know that this is another misunderstood and misinterpreted passages of the Bible, as though the passage is a treatise on the nature of soul and spirit. (Isn’t it interesting that the folks who make such theories completely ignore “joints and marrow” part of the scripture?)

The context makes it abundantly clear that the talk is about the separation of those who accept the word of God (the message to enter the rest) and those who don’t. Those who reject the message would continue in their attempt to overthrow the Roman administration and would perish when the Roman army would come and invade Judea and Jerusalem (and it happened in 70 AD).

The Word of God, as a sword, was a device that would separate those who accept it and those who don’t.

(You may be reminded of Eph 6:17, which equates “the Word of God” to “the Sword of the Spirit”)

Many were leaving the way of insurrection and rebellion and were entering the rest (Sabbath), a.k.a, the Kingdom of God/Heaven during the days of Jesus' ministry.
Jesus has mentioned this in:

Mat 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force. (See also Luke 16:16)

Two of the most outstanding examples of such people entering the Kingdom, a.k.a, Sabbath (the rest) would be:

Simon who was called the Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). (His name is misrepresented as Simon the Canaanite in Matt 10:4 and Mar 3:18; he wasn’t a Canaanite. The word mistranslated as Canaanite has it origins in the Hebrew word קָנָא, pronounced as kaw-naw', H7065 in Strong's and means “zealous”.) He went on to become one of the 12 apostles of Jesus.

There was a violent and extremist group among the first century Jews, named Sicarii. These moved around wearing weapons on their backs and would kill anyone who is found to be violating the Jewish Law. Judas Iscariot belonged to this group and his surname has its origins in “ Sicarii”. Given that he was an extreme extremist, it would have been fairly easy for the first century Jewish leaders to entice him into betraying Jesus.

(I’m aware of the objections raised by Christian “scholars” on these points. Their objections are, as kindly as I can put it, silly.)

Jesus’ words were the sword that would cause division between those who accept them and those who reject them, in the land of Judea and Israel.

It was with the backdrop of the sociopolitical unrest prevailed in Judea and the rest of Israel that most of the narratives in the New Testament were written. It was with this backdrop that many of the pronouncements of Jesus were made.

In the passage we are discussing (Matt 10:34-36), Jesus was presenting his own words as a sword. Jesus spoke what he heard from his father (John 12:49). His presence on earth was as Emmanuel, (God is with us: Matt 1:23). Jesus' words were the Word of God. Jews should’ve taken Jesus' words more seriously, as it was the very first time that God spoke to them through his only begotten son (Heb 1:1, 2).

As we have seen in Heb 4:12, the Word of God is the sword that would separate those who accept it and those who reject it. Those who accept the Word of God would enter the Kingdom, a.k.a, God’s rest and those who reject it would continue in their rebellion against the Roman administration. As for those who reject Jesus' words, they have a new enemy in their own family members who entered the Rest / Kingdom, apart from the Roman administration and Jesus (who was exposing the errors of their religion). Their anger towards those family members who entered the Kingdom resulted in their persecuting the first century believers, as we read in Acts.
The passage in question is not about Jesus bringing a literal sword on the earth or causing rifts within families.

The sword that proceeds from the mouth of the Word of God. (Rev 19:13-15)

Rev 19:13 ...the name by which he is called is The Word of God.

Rev 19:15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron.

I hope that you realize that the sword that proceeds from the Word of God is the Word of God itself. (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12). The talk here is about the proclamation of the gospel in the Jewish settlements, among Jews and proselytes, during 30 to 70 AD. This eventful period, which “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17:6), though short, is figuratively called the 1000 years or the millennium.

It’s popularly believed that this “Word of God” would come from heaven on a “literal” white horse and would wage war against one and all (Rev 19:1).

The words that Jesus spoke during his earthly ministry personified as “The Word of God”.

Please read the following passage slowly and carefully:

John 12:48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words HAS A JUDGE (as though the judge were a different person); the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.

The judge that had to judge those Jews who reject Jesus and his words were the words Jesus already spoke, and not Jesus coming back from heaven as the Word of God (Rev 19). His words sealed the fate (so to say) of those who accepted them and those who rejected them.

(The last days mentioned in John 12:48 can’t be different from the days during which God spoken through his son. Heb 1:1-2).

Hope this would help a few and would engender a healthy discussion.

In Christ,
Tomsan Kattackal

TaZ's Whateverology

There's nothing wrong with the God of the Old Testament!

The shortest possible refutal of the doctrine of rapture.

Daniel 12ᵗʰ chapter and "The Time of the End"

Balaam, Job, and Jethro in the Jewish writings.

Jannes and Jambres and "the Jewish Fables"

Balaam has a larger role in the biblical narrative than what we used to think of him.

Hostilities between Edomites and Israelites and Edomite attempts to destroy Israelites in Egypt.

Schemes to contain the growth of Israeli Population.

The two Advisors of the king of Egypt.

This was the juncture at which Balaam arrived in Egypt.

Another attempt at containing Israeli population growth.

Kenites, the descendants of Jethro, became Scribes

“the Chamber of Hewn Stone”

The most vital question: Did Job's and Moses' lifetimes overlap?

Job…was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. (Job 1:1)

1COR 11:10 ISN'T ABOUT THE FALLEN ANGELS. IT'S ABOUT JUDAIZERS.

The "this generation" of Mat 24:34; Mar 13:30; and ‎Luk 21:32 ISN'T YOUR (as in a 21ˢᵗ century human being's) generation.

“This generation” in The Olivet Discourse

Another passage where these Greek words occur in exactly the same order and form.

Robinson's Morphological Codes

The only sign that would be given to the “This generation” Jesus was mentioning.

"The Heaven and Earth" = the temple at Jerusalem (from Haggai 2)

Let's study the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen again. (Matt 21:33–46)

Kingdom of God v/s Kingdom of Heaven and a bunch of "scholarly" nonsense!

Did the scribes corrupt the Law? (Jer 8:8)

The God of the Old Testament was neither a warlord nor a violent character.

Gog, Esther, the “partial fulfillment” of Revelation 20 and Septuagint.

The Bones of Simon Peter.

Peter's own words:

The gap of time between 2 Peter and Jude.

A positive reading of “when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8b)

Revelation 19, Snippet #1: Do you see any warfare here?, I don't.

1 Corinthians 13 is not about the cessation of the gifts of the Spirit.

“The Scripture cannot be broken” - A case against “Hell”

If John Wesley knew that Matthew 24 is about the destruction of Jerusalem - 70 AD, why your pastor doesn't?

1Cor 3:15: Has nothing to do with your having to go through hell to enter heaven.

Dear Futurist:Make your pastor to read the words of Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340) on Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

CHAPTER 7. The Predictions of Christ.

Will Calvinists (at least) listen to what John Calvin had to say about Matthew 24:34?

“Christians” isn't a name called by the non-believers (“pagans”) of Antioch!

The Greek word that is translated as “called” in Acts 11:26.

If “Christian” were a derogatory name, why did Peter use it?

Satan Myth: On Zionist Biblical Commentaries and the identity of the lion from whose mouth Paul was delivered.

Was Jesus really tested by Satan? - a Sequel, the Essene Connection.

I believe that Jesus was in Qumran.

The Essene Quarters of Jerusalem and Mark, the author of the 2nd gospel.

"Magi" and "sorcerer".

Did Jesus come to bring a sword upon earth? (Matt 10:34-36)

The Essene Quarters of Jerusalem and Mark, the author of the 2^nd gospel.