Two Witnesses - A Biblical Perspective

[TribulationSigns]

Zechariah 4:11-14 below in context tells the reader (These Are The Two Annointed Ones) simple, clear, easy to understand, as you disregard this basic biblical truth

Ah yes—“simple, clear, easy to understand.”

Apparently the rule is: if Zechariah says “two anointed ones,” we shut the Bible, stop comparing Scripture with Scripture, and announce, “Well, obviously that means two literal future men!”

Except Zechariah never says that.

You keep repeating “These are the two anointed ones” as though I disagree with the verse. I DON'T. I fully accept it.

What I reject is your assumption that:

“two anointed ones” = “two literal individual men who will appear in the future.”

Show me where Zechariah 4:14 says that.

It doesn't.

You call your interpretation “simple, clear, easy to understand,” but that is exactly the problem with a carnal, wooden reading of prophetic imagery! It sees two and says, “Two men!” It sees death and says, “Two physical corpses!” It sees fire coming from their mouths and somehow decides that part can be figurative while insisting everything else must be literal.

Meanwhile, Zechariah is showing us olive trees, branches, golden pipes, oil, and a candlestick, and Revelation calls the witnesses olive trees and candlesticks.

Apparently all those symbols are perfectly acceptable—until someone actually interprets them symbolically.

Then suddenly it's “malarkey.”

Interesting.

Revelation itself tells us:

“The seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.”
— Revelation 1:20

So I am not having difficulty understanding Zechariah 4:14. I understand perfectly well that they are called the two anointed ones.

The question you continually avoid is:

WHAT DO THE TWO ANOINTED ONES REPRESENT?

Repeating their title does not answer that question.

God's people are anointed by the Holy Spirit and commissioned to bear witness to Christ. Christ sent His disciples two by two, consistent with the biblical principle that testimony is established by two witnesses. The Church collectively bears Christ's testimony before the world.

That is why I compare Zechariah 4 with Revelation 1, Revelation 11, Deuteronomy 19:15, Luke 10, Acts 1:8, and the rest of Scripture.

You apparently prefer:

“Two means two men. Simple! Case closed!”

LOL!

Well, if that is where you intend to remain, there really isn't much more for me to explain.

You have already decided that the prophetic symbols must fit the literalistic framework you learned from a Sunday School of premillennial teaching. Until you are willing to question that assumption and allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, we will simply go around in circles.

Jesus repeatedly said:

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

Understanding prophetic Scripture requires more than seeing the word two and counting to two.

So yes, bud, I read Zechariah 4:14.

Now please read everything around it.

 

[TribulationSigns]

(Two Witnesses, A Biblical Perspective)

Two future prophets that will have literal physical bodies that die, and they will have power from God to bring literal plagues upon this literal earth as often as they will, a complete remake of Moses/Aaron against Pharaoh of Egypt

Jesus Is The Lord

(Future, Literal, Unfulfilled)

Revelation 11:3-18KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.
5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.

Chuckle!

Bud, you are doing exactly what I have been pointing out.

You put your interpretation in bold:

“Two future prophets.”
“Literal physical bodies.”
“Literal plagues.”
“Future, Literal, Unfulfilled.”

Then you quote Revelation 11 as though the passage itself said those words.

But it doesn't.

Where does Revelation 11:3–6 say:

“These are two future individual men with literal physical bodies”?

Please show me the verse.

You cannot, because that sentence comes from your flawed interpretive system, not from the text.

And now you say this is a “complete remake of Moses/Aaron against Pharaoh.”

Interesting! Because Revelation 11 doesn't say Moses and Aaron either! Hello?

In fact, the imagery combines characteristics associated particularly with Elijah and Moses.

“These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not…”
— Revelation 11:6

That recalls Elijah.

“…and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues…”
— Revelation 11:6

That recalls Moses.

So John is drawing upon Old Testament prophetic imagery. But you immediately turn those allusions into proof that two literal future men must reenact those miracles "physically."

That conclusion does not follow.

Let me use your own “simple, clear, literal” method consistently.

Verse 5 says:

“Fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies.”

Okay then.

Do you believe two future men will literally open their mouths and shoot physical flames like human flamethrowers?

If you say yes, at least you are being consistent.

But if you say the fire represents the power or judgment of God's Word, congratulations—you have just acknowledged symbolic language in the very passage you insist must be literal.

And Scripture already gives us precedent:

“Behold, I will make my words in thy mouth fire, and this people wood, and it shall devour them.”
— Jeremiah 5:14

Did Jeremiah literally breathe fire?

Of course not.

God's Word in the prophet's mouth was described as fire because His Word brought judgment.

So why is symbolic prophetic language suddenly forbidden when we reach Revelation 11?

Then verse 4 says:

“These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.”

Are these two men literally botanical olive trees?

No.

Are they literally metal lampstands?

No.

So before we even reach verse 6, your claim that this passage demands wooden literalism has already collapsed.

The chapter itself is speaking through prophetic symbols.

And Christ has already told us what candlesticks represent in Revelation:

“The seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.”
— Revelation 1:20

That isn't my definition.

Christ gave it.

The witnesses also prophesy for 1,260 days, corresponding to the symbolic 42-month period used elsewhere in Revelation. They are clothed in sackcloth. They are olive trees. They are candlesticks. Fire comes from their mouths. A beast rises from the bottomless pit and makes war against them.

Yet your method seems to be:

“Literal! Literal! Literal!”

Except, apparently, when literal becomes inconvenient.

That isn't consistent interpretation.

Revelation is apocalyptic prophecy saturated with Old Testament imagery. The Moses-and-Elijah characteristics tell us about the nature and authority of the witnesses' testimony. They do not automatically prove that two individual men must appear in the future and physically duplicate Moses' and Elijah's miracles.

God's Church bears prophetic witness through the Word of God and by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Christ said:

“Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me… unto the uttermost part of the earth.”
— Acts 1:8

There are Christ's witnesses.

Not merely two men standing somewhere in future Jerusalem, but Christ's Spirit-empowered witnesses carrying His testimony throughout the earth.

So respectfully, posting Revelation 11 again does not answer my argument.

I have Revelation 11 too.

The disagreement isn't over whether the passage exists. The disagreement is over how apocalyptic prophecy should be interpreted.

You keep putting “FUTURE, LITERAL, UNFULFILLED” above the passage as though those words were inspired Scripture.

They aren't.

That is your theological interpretation of the passage.

So instead of quoting the same verses again and writing LITERAL in bold letters, demonstrate from Scripture why:

olive trees must represent two men,
candlesticks must represent two men,
fire from their mouths must be physical,
1,260 days must be literal calendar days,
and the witnesses must be two future individuals.

Until then, you haven't disproved my interpretation.

You have merely repeated yours louder.

And repetition is not exegesis.

Selah.

 

[TribulationSigns]

And one more thing...bud...

And since you insist that Revelation 11 must be read literally, I'll leave you with one final thought.

Revelation 11:5 says:

“Fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies.”

So when you actually see two literal men breathing literal fire out of their literal mouths and literally devouring their enemies with it, let me know.

Then perhaps we can talk about your insistence that everything here must be literal.

Until then, simply repeating “literal, literal, literal” does not make your interpretation biblical. Revelation itself uses symbolic and prophetic imagery, and Scripture must interpret Scripture.

At this point, I am no longer interested in continuing this dialogue with you. I have explained my position repeatedly and provided the Scriptures supporting it. You continue responding by repeating the same assertion rather than actually addressing the biblical argument.

So we can leave it there.

Therefore...when the two literal fire-breathing men show up, feel free to get back to me. Until then, Good bye!

 

[Truth7t7]

Ah yes—“simple, clear, easy to understand.”

Apparently the rule is: if Zechariah says “two anointed ones,” we shut the Bible, stop comparing Scripture with Scripture, and announce, “Well, obviously that means two literal future men!”

Except Zechariah never says that.

You keep repeating “These are the two anointed ones” as though I disagree with the verse. I DON'T. I fully accept it.

What I reject is your assumption that:

“two anointed ones” = “two literal individual men who will appear in the future.”

Show me where Zechariah 4:14 says that.

It doesn't.

You call your interpretation “simple, clear, easy to understand,” but that is exactly the problem with a carnal, wooden reading of prophetic imagery! It sees two and says, “Two men!” It sees death and says, “Two physical corpses!” It sees fire coming from their mouths and somehow decides that part can be figurative while insisting everything else must be literal.

Meanwhile, Zechariah is showing us olive trees, branches, golden pipes, oil, and a candlestick, and Revelation calls the witnesses olive trees and candlesticks.

Apparently all those symbols are perfectly acceptable—until someone actually interprets them symbolically.

Then suddenly it's “malarkey.”

Interesting.

Revelation itself tells us:



So I am not having difficulty understanding Zechariah 4:14. I understand perfectly well that they are called the two anointed ones.

The question you continually avoid is:

WHAT DO THE TWO ANOINTED ONES REPRESENT?

Repeating their title does not answer that question.

God's people are anointed by the Holy Spirit and commissioned to bear witness to Christ. Christ sent His disciples two by two, consistent with the biblical principle that testimony is established by two witnesses. The Church collectively bears Christ's testimony before the world.

That is why I compare Zechariah 4 with Revelation 1, Revelation 11, Deuteronomy 19:15, Luke 10, Acts 1:8, and the rest of Scripture.

You apparently prefer:

“Two means two men. Simple! Case closed!”

LOL!

Well, if that is where you intend to remain, there really isn't much more for me to explain.

You have already decided that the prophetic symbols must fit the literalistic framework you learned from a Sunday School of premillennial teaching. Until you are willing to question that assumption and allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, we will simply go around in circles.

Jesus repeatedly said:



Understanding prophetic Scripture requires more than seeing the word two and counting to two.

So yes, bud, I read Zechariah 4:14.

Now please read everything around it.

Zechariah 4:14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses)

Zechariah 4:14KJV
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Zechariah 4:14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses)

Zechariah 4:14KJV
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Chuckle... Patting on your back and say to you, "see ya when you have two fire-breathing men."

 

[Truth7t7]

Chuckle... Patting on your back and say to you, "see ya when you have two fire-breathing men."

In your previous posting you've tied Zechariah 4:11-14 & Revelation 11:3-4 together as being the same descriptions in parallel teachings, do you "Agree" or "Disagree"?

Zechariah 4:14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses) Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14KJV
11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

 

[TribulationSigns]

In your previous posting you've tied Zechariah 4:11-14 & Revelation 11:3-4 together as being the same descriptions in parallel teachings, do you "Agree" or "Disagree"?

Zechariah 4:14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses) Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14KJV
11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Read my posts again and again until you realized that you did not pay closely attention to what I said. Your position remains refuted.

 

[Truth7t7]

Read my posts again and again until you realized that you did not pay closely attention to what I said. Your position remains refuted.

Once Again, Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses) Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14KJV
11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

 

[Earburner]

We should be careful to discover a forest of camouflage and miss seeing the two images of the messages overpowered by the deluge of peoples fanaticise as to who they are, and what their entity types might be.

Shalom

Well, since many here have chimed in as to who the two witnesses are, what is your understanding?

 

[Earburner]

Once Again, Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses) Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14KJV
11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

@TribulationSigns . What are you "rolling on the floor laughing" at? @Truth7t7 provided the correct OT prophecy of Zech. 5:14 (520 BC.) about the two witnesses.

SURELY all would agree, that Zech. 4:14 IS NOT a prophecy about a fabricated event far out into the future, about "two witnesses".
There is no need to prophecy 2550+ years into the far future about "two witnesses", when in 520 years, THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT for both God and man was first and foremost.
And that is, John the Baptist was THE witness of who Jesus was/is, and Jesus was
the witness of who God the Father IS.

 

[TribulationSigns]

@TribulationSigns . What are you "rolling on the floor laughing" at? @Truth7t7 provided the correct OT prophecy of Zech. 5:14 (520 BC.) about the two witnesses.

SURELY all would agree, that Zech. 4:14 IS NOT a prophecy about a fabricated event far out into the future, about "two witnesses".
There is no need to prophecy 2550+ years into the far future about "two witnesses", when in 520 years, THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT for both God and man was first and foremost.
And that is, John the Baptist was THE witness of who Jesus was/is, and Jesus was
the witness of who God the Father IS.

Truth7t7 did not prove anything biblically. Simply pointing out that Zechariah was written around 520 BC does not establish that Zechariah 4:14 refers to John the Baptist and Jesus, nor does it disprove its connection with the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11.

What exactly does “520 BC” or the number of years between Zechariah and Christ prove? Nothing by itself. A date is not biblical exegesis.

The real question is: How does Scripture interpret the imagery? HELLO?!?!

Revelation 11:3–4 explicitly says:

“And I will give power unto my two witnesses... These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.”

That language clearly draws from Zechariah 4, where we read of the two olive trees and then:

“These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.” — Zechariah 4:14

So John himself, under inspiration, deliberately uses the imagery of Zechariah 4 when describing the Two Witnesses. That textual connection actually needs to be dealt with.

Saying, “Zechariah was written in 520 BC, and Christ came roughly 520 years later, therefore this must refer to John the Baptist and Jesus,” is an assertion, not an exegetical argument! That is speculation! Where does Zechariah 4 identify those two olive trees as John the Baptist and Jesus? Where does Revelation 11 make that identification? You made it up...desperately!

And the claim that there would be “no need” for God to give a prophecy reaching 2,000+ years into the future is especially weak. Since when does man decide how far into the future God may prophesy? Daniel, Revelation, and numerous other prophetic passages concern events extending far beyond the immediate generation in which they were written.

If you want to prove that the Two Witnesses are Jesus and John the Baptist, then prove it from the text. Dates, assumptions about how far prophecy is “allowed” to reach, and declarations about what God supposedly had “no need” to prophesy are not biblical exegesis!!

The connection we actually have in the text is straightforward:

Zechariah 4: two olive trees standing before the Lord.
Revelation 11: two witnesses identified as the two olive trees standing before the God of the earth.

Deal with that biblical connection first. Then we can talk about interpretation. Selah!

 

[Earburner]

In your previous posting you've tied Zechariah 4:11-14 & Revelation 11:3-4 together as being the same descriptions in parallel teachings, do you "Agree" or "Disagree"?

Zechariah 4:14 & Revelation 11:3-4 represent the very same description in parallel teachings, (Two Anointed Ones-Two Witnesses) Agree or Disagree?

Zechariah 4:11-14KJV
11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Revelation 11:3-4KJV
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

To @TribulationSigns thanks for your lengthy, detailed analysis. But I don't believe that God is all that complicated to understand.

I for one believe that the OC prophecies mainly "testify" of Jesus.
John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Zech. 4:14 would be one of them.

 

[TribulationSigns]

To @TribulationSigns thanks for your lengthy, detailed analysis. But I don't believe that God is all that complicated to understand.

I for one believe that the OC prophecies mainly "testify" of Jesus.
John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Zech. 4:14 would be one of them.

Seriously, this response only shows that you are missing the point of biblical exegesis!

Yes, John 5:39 teaches that the Scriptures testify of Christ. No one here is denying that. But that does NOT mean you can take every Old Testament passage and simply declare, “This particular verse must directly refer to Jesus and John the Baptist,” without demonstrating it from Scripture.

That is not exegesis. That is an assumption. That is a speculation. Get it?

You wrote, “Zech. 4:14 would be one of them.” Fine—then prove it from the text. Where does Zechariah 4:14 identify the two anointed ones as Jesus and John the Baptist? Where does John 5:39 make that identification? You couldn't!

More importantly, you are completely sidestepping the inspired interpretation given to us in Revelation itself, so listen carefully for once:

Zechariah 4:14: “These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”

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

John deliberately uses the imagery and language of Zechariah 4 when describing the Two Witnesses. That is an actual textual connection. Yet instead of explaining that connection, you simply quote John 5:39 and announce that Zechariah 4:14 is about Jesus and John the Baptist?!

And saying, “God isn't that complicated to understand,” doesn't solve the problem either. Scripture interpreting Scripture isn't “complicating” God's Word. It is how we avoid imposing our own ideas upon it which many of you do!

Of course the Old Testament testifies of Christ. But Christ Himself is also the One who reveals and defines the Two Witnesses through Revelation. Do you realize this? You cannot use “the Scriptures testify of Christ” as a shortcut that allows you to ignore what Revelation 11 actually does with Zechariah 4.

So again, here is a question for you: show us from Scripture - - chapter and verse - - that the two olive trees of Zechariah 4 are Jesus and John the Baptist.

Simply saying, “I believe they are,” proves NOTHING but pathetic assumption! Selah!

 

[Earburner]

Truth7t7 did not prove anything biblically. Simply pointing out that Zechariah was written around 520 BC does not establish that Zechariah 4:14 refers to John the Baptist and Jesus, nor does it disprove its connection with the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11.

What exactly does “520 BC” or the number of years between Zechariah and Christ prove? Nothing by itself. A date is not biblical exegesis.

The real question is: How does Scripture interpret the imagery? HELLO?!?!

Revelation 11:3–4 explicitly says:



That language clearly draws from Zechariah 4, where we read of the two olive trees and then:



So John himself, under inspiration, deliberately uses the imagery of Zechariah 4 when describing the Two Witnesses. That textual connection actually needs to be dealt with.

Saying, “Zechariah was written in 520 BC, and Christ came roughly 520 years later, therefore this must refer to John the Baptist and Jesus,” is an assertion, not an exegetical argument! That is speculation! Where does Zechariah 4 identify those two olive trees as John the Baptist and Jesus? Where does Revelation 11 make that identification? You made it up...desperately!

And the claim that there would be “no need” for God to give a prophecy reaching 2,000+ years into the future is especially weak. Since when does man decide how far into the future God may prophesy? Daniel, Revelation, and numerous other prophetic passages concern events extending far beyond the immediate generation in which they were written.

If you want to prove that the Two Witnesses are Jesus and John the Baptist, then prove it from the text. Dates, assumptions about how far prophecy is “allowed” to reach, and declarations about what God supposedly had “no need” to prophesy are not biblical exegesis!!

The connection we actually have in the text is straightforward:

Zechariah 4: two olive trees standing before the Lord.
Revelation 11: two witnesses identified as the two olive trees standing before the God of the earth.

Deal with that biblical connection first. Then we can talk about interpretation. Selah!

My point is, our association about time, in the midst of extreme error of how/when events shall be fulfilled in 2550+ years, as opposed to those events that were about to take place within 520 years BC.

It is all about what took place at the END of 520 years BC., that is far more crucial and immediate to know about, than a fabricated story about OTHER Two Witnesses, who will NEVER show, even after 2550+ years from the date of Zechariah.
Edit:
I was not disregarding your research and input. You did provide alot of worthy information in reference to the "church age".
One point about Zech. 4:12, is that about the "golden oil". The two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves.
Golden oil to me is symbolic of the Holy Spirit of God. As you know, of all people for all time, NO ONE was ever born HAVING the Holy Spirit at birth, except John the Baptist and Jesus.

 

[TribulationSigns]

My point is, our association about time, in the midst of extreme error of how/when events shall be fulfilled in 2550+ years, as opposed to those events that were about to take place within 520 years BC.

It is all about what took place at the END of 520 years BC., that is far more crucial and immediate to know about, than a fabricated story about OTHER Two Witnesses, who will NEVER show, even after 2550+ years from the date of Zechariah.

Gee-whiz! You are still avoiding my question.

You guys are wasting an incredible amount of time fighting over 520 years versus 2,550+ years, while you have not first established from God's Word who the Two Witnesses actually are.

That is backwards exegesis.

Before arguing about when the Two Witnesses appear, shouldn't you first determine who or what they are according to Scripture? Otherwise, you are building an entire chronology upon an identity you have merely assumed.

You keep calling other interpretations “fabricated,” yet you still have not answered the basic questions I asked:

Where does Zechariah 4:14 identify the two olive trees as Jesus and John the Baptist?

Where does Revelation 11 identify its Two Witnesses as Jesus and John the Baptist?

And why does Revelation 11:4 deliberately identify the Two Witnesses using the imagery of “the two olive trees” and “the two candlesticks” standing before God?

Those are exegetical questions. Repeating “520 BC” and “2,550+ years” does not help you case!

You are arguing chronology before establishing identity. LOL!

I am interested in what God's Word says the Two Witnesses represent—not in calculations designed to force Zechariah 4 into a predetermined timeline.

First establish WHO the Two Witnesses are from Scripture. Then we can discuss WHEN their testimony takes place.

Until you do that, arguing about 520 years versus 2,550 years is just going around in circles.

Pathetic.

 

[Earburner]

Seriously, this response only shows that you are missing the point of biblical exegesis!

My reference for understanding anything in scripture is not by "the wisdom of men", but rather what "the Holy Spirit teaches". 1 Cor. ch. 2.

Yes, John 5:39 teaches that the Scriptures testify of Christ. No one here is denying that. But that does NOT mean you can take every Old Testament passage and simply declare, “This particular verse must directly refer to Jesus and John the Baptist,” without demonstrating it from Scripture.

That is not exegesis. That is an assumption. That is a speculation. Get it?

See my reply above.

You wrote, “Zech. 4:14 would be one of them.” Fine—then prove it from the text. Where does Zechariah 4:14 identify the two anointed ones as Jesus and John the Baptist? Where does John 5:39 make that identification? You couldn't!

I did!! God said that they are "His two anointed ones....". To be anointed is to have the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit of God.
No one, not even Abraham or Moses etc. were so blessed as was John the Baptist and Jesus. The reason being is that "Jesus was not yet glorified" John 7:39

More importantly, you are completely sidestepping the inspired interpretation given to us in Revelation itself, so listen carefully for once:

Zechariah 4:14: “These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”

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

I hope that you are aware that the book of Revelation came directly from God the Father and was handed down to Jesus, the angel, then finally to John. Rev.1:1. I would remind you of Isa. 55:8:9, of how God in His Eternity, thinks/speaks in the past, the present and in the future, all at the SAME time. Therefore, the book of Rev. is not strictly about the future, even though a couple of ignorant Theologins (Darby & Schofield) in the 1800's have deemed it to be so, whereby MANY have foolishly erred even to the point of corrupting the understanding about the 70 weeks in Dan. 9:24-27.

John deliberately uses the imagery and language of Zechariah 4 when describing the Two Witnesses. That is an actual textual connection. Yet instead of explaining that connection, you simply quote John 5:39 and announce that Zechariah 4:14 is about Jesus and John the Baptist?!

It most definitely is about the past works of John and Jesus.

And saying, “God isn't that complicated to understand,” doesn't solve the problem either. Scripture interpreting Scripture isn't “complicating” God's Word. It is how we avoid imposing our own ideas upon it which many of you do!

Scripture interpreting scripture is necessary, as long as it is being done through what the Holy Spirit teaches, and not that by what Theologins and Bible colleges teach, such as that of Darby and Scofield.

Of course the Old Testament testifies of Christ. But Christ Himself is also the One who reveals and defines the Two Witnesses through Revelation. Do you realize this?

Yes of course, He Himself is "the Spirit of Truth"

You cannot use “the Scriptures testify of Christ” as a shortcut that allows you to ignore what Revelation 11 actually does with Zechariah 4.

I am not using a shortcut! I simply understand and show that the two witnesses have already have come, and thatTHEY were anointed before birth.

So again, here is a question for you: show us from Scripture - - chapter and verse - - that the two olive trees of Zechariah 4 are Jesus and John the Baptist.

Simply saying, “I believe they are,” proves NOTHING but pathetic assumption! Selah!

I have been doing that steadily all along.

 

[TribulationSigns]

My reference for understanding anything in scripture is not by "the wisdom of men", but rather what "the Holy Spirit teaches".

Really?

After all of that, you still have not proven your claim from Scripture. You keep insisting that the Two Witnesses are Jesus Christ and John the Baptist, but repeating your interpretation is not the same thing as demonstrating it biblically.

Appealing to the Holy Spirit, John 5:39, John 7:39, or attacking Darby and Scofield does not answer the question. I am not even defending Darby or teaching dispensationalism. You went wildly not know what I believe. I am only asking you to deal with the actual biblical connection: Zechariah 4:14 and Revelation 11:4.

Revelation 11 explicitly identifies the Two Witnesses as “the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth,” deliberately drawing upon Zechariah 4. And Revelation 1:20 already tells us that candlesticks symbolize churches. Yet you have provided no Scripture identifying those two olive trees/candlesticks must be Jesus and John the Baptist. You NEVER did!

Saying Jesus and John were "anointed" does not prove they are Zechariah's two anointed ones. That is your inference, not an identification made by Scripture. Where?! Selah!

So we're right back where we started: show the chapter and verse that identifies the Two Witnesses as Jesus Christ and John the Baptist. Until you can do that, you have NOT established biblical exegesis—you've merely repeated your "theory" and claimed the "Holy Spirit taught it." Oh please! LOL!

That's precisely what you were asked to prove, and once again, you STILL came up short.

 

[Jay Ross]

Well, since many here have chimed in as to who the two witnesses are, what is your understanding?

Since this event is still in our distant future, and I will not see it unfold, determining who or what entity the two witnesses are, has no bearing on what my relationship with God should look like for this present time.

What John is telling us that in the distant future, there will be two witnesses who will be killed by the beast and then raised up again after a number of days and are then call to ascend up into heaven.

I understand and believe that this will happen and in doing so I am believing in the word of God.

Anything else is irrelevant for me at this time.

Shalom

 

[Earburner]

Really?

After all of that, you still have not proven your claim from Scripture. You keep insisting that the Two Witnesses are Jesus Christ and John the Baptist, but repeating your interpretation is not the same thing as demonstrating it biblically.

Appealing to the Holy Spirit, John 5:39, John 7:39, or attacking Darby and Scofield does not answer the question. I am not even defending Darby or teaching dispensationalism. You went wildly not know what I believe. I am only asking you to deal with the actual biblical connection: Zechariah 4:14 and Revelation 11:4.

Revelation 11 explicitly identifies the Two Witnesses as “the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth,” deliberately drawing upon Zechariah 4. And Revelation 1:20 already tells us that candlesticks symbolize churches. Yet you have provided no Scripture identifying those two olive trees/candlesticks must be Jesus and John the Baptist. You NEVER did!

Saying Jesus and John were "anointed" does not prove they are Zechariah's two anointed ones. That is your inference, not an identification made by Scripture. Where?! Selah!

So we're right back where we started: show the chapter and verse that identifies the Two Witnesses as Jesus Christ and John the Baptist. Until you can do that, you have NOT established biblical exegesis—you've merely repeated your "theory" and claimed the "Holy Spirit taught it." Oh please! LOL!

That's precisely what you were asked to prove, and once again, you STILL came up short.

I don't interpret Zech. 3:8-10, 4:11-14 through Rev. 11:3-4, but rather in the reverse.
In fact, for all of Rev. the same applys.
Through the teaching of the Holy Spirit (not the teaching of pre- mil church-ianity), I let the Bible interpret Revelation. I have shown you that by my understanding of "the golden oil" in Zech. 4.

Pre-mil church-ianity has ruined itself by the corruption of moving the 70th week about Jesus into the far future. Along with it went many things also. One of them is their foul concept about the two witnesses.

 

[Earburner]

Really?

After all of that, you still have not proven your claim from Scripture. You keep insisting that the Two Witnesses are Jesus Christ and John the Baptist, but repeating your interpretation is not the same thing as demonstrating it biblically.

Appealing to the Holy Spirit, John 5:39, John 7:39, or attacking Darby and Scofield does not answer the question. I am not even defending Darby or teaching dispensationalism. You went wildly not know what I believe. I am only asking you to deal with the actual biblical connection: Zechariah 4:14 and Revelation 11:4.

Revelation 11 explicitly identifies the Two Witnesses as “the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth,” deliberately drawing upon Zechariah 4. And Revelation 1:20 already tells us that candlesticks symbolize churches. Yet you have provided no Scripture identifying those two olive trees/candlesticks must be Jesus and John the Baptist. You NEVER did!

Saying Jesus and John were "anointed" does not prove they are Zechariah's two anointed ones. That is your inference, not an identification made by Scripture. Where?! Selah!

So we're right back where we started: show the chapter and verse that identifies the Two Witnesses as Jesus Christ and John the Baptist. Until you can do that, you have NOT established biblical exegesis—you've merely repeated your "theory" and claimed the "Holy Spirit taught it." Oh please! LOL!

That's precisely what you were asked to prove, and once again, you STILL came up short.

You sound just like the Pharisees who derided Jesus.

In the NT scriptures, there are 51 scriptures about John the Baptist, but you don't hear a peep from church-ianity about how important his own sacrificial work was in establishng who Jesus is, and the need for repentance. King Herod didn't like that idea of repentance, so he beheaded him.

Call my understanding of who Zech 3:8-10, 4:11-14 is talking about, of what you will.
If you are more inclined to listen to the Holy Spirit, and not the wisdom of men in church-ianity, you will receive His teaching also. It's all about who is teaching you from within, and not from without. 1 Cor. ch. 2.