Lost in Translation on Book of Revelation Has Some Worthwhile Points and Some Not So Worthwhile

April 24, 2014 at 1:20 PM 2 comments

LIT2I’ve been busy reading through a series of books by John Klein and Adam Spears called “Lost in Translation, Volumes 1, 2 & 3.” The subtitle is “The Book of Revelation Through Hebrew Eyes.”

I’m not sure how heavy they are into the Hebraic Roots Movement or not, though in the first volume, they did allude to the fact that they believe the Sabbath (from Friday evening to Saturday evening) should be celebrated by today’s Christian. That gives us a clue. They do not believe that the worship of God should have been changed from the Jewish Sabbath to Sunday, also referred to as the Lord’s Day.

The two also believe that most of the New Testament (they call it the “Renewed Covenant”) was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. I dealt with that subject in an earlier post so there’s no need to revisit it here.

One of the things I have noticed though is that sometimes they wind up opposing their own logic. For instance, they argue that the Rapture is not taught in the Bible at all and it is best to understand the concept in terms of it being a “harvest.”

“The term ‘Rapture’ is not used anywhere in the Bible. Nor does it show up in any known Christian writings before the year 1830. Neither do its basic tenets, involving two separate end-times visitations by Yeshua during which He (1) first comes invisibly and ‘Raptures’ His church away to allow them to escape the Tribulation that will soon be affecting everyone else still alive on earth, and then (2) comes one more time, visibly, to bring justice to the nations and end the age.” [1]

What is frustrating is that these reasons have been more than adequately responded to by others. Because the word “Rapture” is not used in the Bible does not mean it is not a true doctrine. You won’t find the word “Trinity” either, but does that mean that God is not three in one?

The other problem is that there are not two separate comings of Jesus during the end time. Even Dr. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum (Jewish Christian) acknowledges this point. As Fruchtenbaum points out, when Jesus Raptures His Bride, He simply steps out of the third heaven and calls His bride up to Him, meeting His Bride in the air. At no point during the Rapture does Jesus actually come to the earth. Only during His physical Second Coming does Jesus return to the earth.

But the two authors go on with their argument.

“…in dealing with any absence of any mention of the Rapture…most such commentators tend to suggest that teachings about the Rapture ceased completely after the Apostolic Age giving us more than seventeen centuries of total silence regarding what many consider one of the most important doctrines to be extrapolated from the Bible. In other words, during those seventeen centuries some of the most brilliant theologians who ever lived somehow missed it completely.” [2]

This type of statement concerns me for its seeming inability to come to logical conclusions based on the context of history. Beyond this, though I believe the Rapture will occur and will do so prior to the Tribulation, it is not one of the most important doctrines from the Bible. The Deity of Christ, sin of humanity, the salvation offered, the virgin birth, the first coming, the second physical coming and numerous other doctrines have far more importance than the Rapture. I know I’m not the only one who thinks that either.

However, the very logical reason why the Rapture was not taught for 17 centuries has everything to do with the fact that the Roman Catholic Church was the only game in town. Their doctrine, in large measure, came from people like Augustine. In fact, much of the Eschatology (study of end times) theology that became part and parcel of the Roman Catholic Church came directly from Augustine, which was largely allegorical in nature.

Here, the two authors are using the argument that how could the Rapture doctrine – if it was/is true – be missed by so many brilliant men over the space of 1,700 years? It certainly seems unfathomable to the authors.

Yet, a mere two to three pages later, they begin a new chapter and open that chapter with a reference to Ezekiel 37:3-6, which deals with God’s question to Ezekiel, “Son of man, can these bones live?” After quoting verses three to six, they make a few observations.

“The above passage contains a great number of intriguing ‘rabbi trails.’ For example, this is the primary reference to the Resurrection in the Old Testament (Tanakh). Indeed, it’s quite possible that no one in the last 4,000 years has yet unraveled all its prophetic implications, considered in context with the verses that surround it.” [3]

Then, after making those statements, they simply say, “But we leave that to another time and place. For now, we want to link up our own text with the indelible image that Ezekiel provided. Because, it’s all about putting muscles and meat on the bones of the structure we’ve already shown you.” [4] Then they go back into their discussion in Revelation about how they believe that the menorah is used by God to connect everything together there.

On one hand, when it comes to the Rapture, they wonder how brilliant commentators could have missed it over a period of 1,700 years? On the other hand, the fact that no one has pulled out all of the important content from Ezekiel in 4,000 years is not a big deal.

If people do not see the Rapture in Scripture, that’s fine. It’s between them and the Lord. But to use this type of reasoning to disprove what the authors do not believe to be biblical fact doesn’t really cut it as far as I’m concerned.

 

[1] John Klein, Adam Spears, Lost in Translation, Volume 2 (2009), p. 57

[2] Ibid, p. 58

[3] Ibid, p. 63

[4] Ibid. pp. 63-64

Entry filed under: Posttribulational Rapture, Pretribulational Rapture, rapture, Religious - Christian - End Times, Religious - Christian - Prophecy, Religious - Christian - Theology, second coming. Tags: , .

Calling Steve Fletcher Out as a False Prophet – Sorry Steve Fletcher Says We are IN the Tribulation, But Are We?

2 Comments

  • 1. Lester  |  April 24, 2014 at 9:41 PM

    I see your point! However I see no holy day in either Sunday or Saturday. Any day of the week is grounds to fellowship. Saturday keepers are way to close to the Law. As for Rapture well, so may arguments and interpretations of what, where and when gives me a headache sometimes ,LOL! However Father wants to do it is OK with me. As long as He catches me UP to HIM! Augustine of Hippo was a philosopher and I’m convinced a gnostic that did not really recant. He brought much of that cult into the Roman church. Oh the many voices out there that we must endure, LOL!

    • 2. modres  |  April 25, 2014 at 6:22 AM

      I agree on your points, Lester. Frankly, every day should be set aside as a day when true Christians worship.

      As far as Augustine, absolutely. There are indications he was very anti-Semitic as well leading him to at least some of his theological conclusions.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,176 other followers

Our Books on Amazon

Study-Grow-Know Archives

Blog Stats

  • 751,873 hits

%d bloggers like this: