Stumbling Through the Book of Revelation, 1:10

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

In the Spirit.

The picture you get is of a man in a trance. You could have picked him up and carried him out like a wooden plank. He obviously wouldn’t be the first to do that. (Acts 10:10 & 11 - And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth)

But I don’t think that is necessarily the case here. It doesn’t say he is in a trance, and people were physically moved all over the place by the Spirit. Ezekiel 8:3 - And he put forth the form of an hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the inner gate that looketh toward the north; where was the seat of the image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy.

and...

Acts 8:39 -And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Now, he could have been in a trance. I’m not trying to sell a point of view here, I’m just exploring possibilities. I believe the spirit realm is actually another dimension, with its own set of physics, that through the power of God, a person can slip in and out of almost like walking through a curtain. Jesus seemed to do it a lot: John 8:58 - Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. In this verse, it says that Jesus hid Himself. Where do you suppose He hid? He was standing before a crowd in the Temple. It’s not like He could duck behind a pole and sneak out when no one was looking. He had to have hidden in the spirit, or spirit realm. There is also Luke 4:29 & 30 - And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong. But he passing through the midst of them went his way, and Luke 24:31 - And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

Jesus was taken bodily into Heaven. So was Elijah.  Enoch probably was, too. Why couldn't John?

on the Lord's day,

It is astounding to me that most of the commentaries I read say that this means Sunday. The argument goes that Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday, so Christians, very early in Church history, essentially moved the Sabbath from the last day of the week (Saturday), to the first day of the week (Sunday). Ignatius, one of the greatly revered, second generation church leaders (circa 101 A.D.), reportedly endorsed Sunday as the “Christian Sabbath” in an epistle to the Magnesians. (According to “Barnes’ Notes on the Bible”, courtesy of Bible Hub.com)

It may come as a shock to some that I care very little about what the early church leaders thought. Before they had finished writing the books of the Bible, there were already all kinds of doctrinal problems in the church. There was Gnosticism, Legalism, the doctrine of Balaam, the doctrine of the Nicolaitans… The Apostles Peter and Paul had debates over doctrine. I’m more concerned with what the Bible actually says, and what the writer is trying to get across to us.

I’ve read commentaries that say that John’s use of the term “the Lord’s Day” is the first time it was used to refer to Sunday, and so this is where that change was established. This sounds like circular logic to me.

I’m not going to go into a big thing here about how and why the church moved the Sabbath to Sunday, but the fact is, I counted 26 instances of “the Day of the Lord” in the Bible, and every one of them refers to the Day of God’s Wrath.

Isaiah 13:6 -  Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

Jeremiah 46:10 - For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.

Joel 1:15 - Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Amos 5:18 - Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.

Acts 2:20 - The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

Also: Isa 13:9, Lamentations 2:22, Ezekiel 13:5, Ezekiel 30:3, Joel 2:1, Joel 2:11, Joel 2:31, Joel 3:14, Amos 5:20, Obadiah 1:15, Zephaniah 1:7&8,  Zephaniah 1:14, Zechariah 14:1, Malachi 4:5, 1Corinthians 1:8, 1 Corinthians 5:5, 2 Corinthians 1:14, Thessalonians 5:2, and 2 Peter 3:10. A couple of these verses actually used the term twice.

Suddenly, in John’s use of the term, it now refers to Sunday. Why? Because we worship on Sunday. Why do we worship on Sunday? Because John called it the Day of the Lord here.

The abnormally observant could point out here that John didn’t say “Day of the Lord”. He said “the Lord’s Day”.

The Old Testament referred to the “Day of the Lord” because there are no possessive forms for nouns in Hebrew. You can’t say “The Lord’s Day” in Hebrew. The language won’t allow it. But you can do it in Greek. Paul did it referring to the Lord’s Supper in 1Corinthians 11:20, and John does it here.

The idea that John is referring to the Day of Wrath here makes more sense. For crying out loud, that’s what the whole book is about. They don’t call it Apocalypse for nothing.  

How did John get to the Day of the Lord? He was in the spirit (realm). We could call this spiritual realm, this other dimension, “Eternity”. In the Spirit, in God’s realm, in Eternity, there is no time. You can be here and at the end of the world simultaneously. Time itself is a dimension that you step out of when you step into Eternity.

The question then becomes: How do you get to where you can go into and out of these dimensions at will?

Apparently, you can’t. God initiates all these little excursions into Eternity. We are instructed to walk after the Spirit. What does that mean?

This is where it gets a little tough. Walking after the Spirit means being concerned with Spiritual things. Paul has the Spirit as diametrically opposed to worldly things (Galatians 5:17 - For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.), so the more you are concerned with worldly things: your job, your house, your kids, your favorite baseball team, NCIS, politics…., the less you care about the things of the Spirit. As I write this, I am becoming painfully aware of just how spiritual I am not.

Do you think it’s a coincidence that John had this incredible encounter with God after spending some years alone on a rock in the Aegean Sea? There was no internet service. You couldn’t even get radio reception out there. He had nothing to do but commune with God. How often have the great men of God become the great men of God after they spent a lot of time alone in the desert? Even Jesus fasted in the wilderness for 40 days just before He started His ministry.

and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet

I’m reading this book as literally as I can, even realizing that some of it is going to be really strange. I’m coming at this from the hermeneutical position that John was, in fact taken bodily to the spirit realm where he could see all of history. Particularly that part that the Lord will soon have him focussing on: the Great Day of the Lord.

The voice he heard behind him was a great voice. It could have said awesome voice. The kind of voice that can’t be ignored, or even misinterpreted. As soon as we see “as of a trumpet”, everybody (yeah, me too) goes running to find scriptural references to trumpets. There are some verses in Exodus, chapters 19 and 20 that seem to have the trumpet sounding from Heaven. There are a lot of places where the trumpet is used both in ritual sacrifices and as a call to battle.

Then we realise John didn’t say “the sound of a trumpet”, he said “as of a trumpet.”

It’s a simile. John is likening the voice to the sound of a trumpet. Now I’m imagining a voice, the very sound of which will rattle you to your core. The voice came from behind John, but it had his undivided attention. Of course, on the Isle of Patmos, there wasn’t a lot of competition for John’s attention.

It is starting to bother me more and more that there is so much competition for mine.

Thank you to the Blue Letter Bible for allowing me to cut and paste all the scriptures I use right from their website. The last thing I want to do is commit a typo on the Word of God.

Revelation 1:9, An Expositional Commentary

I John,

Remember me? I’m John. You know, your brother and companion….

The previous sentence was God speaking in the first person. Now, John wants to make sure everyone understands that it is him talking about himself now.

who also am your brother,

This is terrible English. My question is: why all the extra verbiage? It’s easy to just delete most of this phrase and end up with “I John, Your brother and companion…", as a lot of translations do, but I can’t get over the feeling I’m missing something if you just ignore the extra words. I actually like the New King James Version to make me feel better about this phrase: “I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation…" .

It just feeeeels better. I know, that’s probably the worst criteria to use, but I can’t help it.

John, who had to be the most venerated saint of his time, and the only surviving of the original twelve Apostles, didn’t introduced himself in terms of the lofty status he was no doubt held in among those he wrote to. He considered himself nothing more than a brother and companion. Just another servant of God.

and companion in tribulation,

This part, I have a real problem with. “Your brother and companion in tribulation."

I have noticed all the servants of Jesus in the New Testament suffered. Then, they rejoiced in their suffering. Acts 5:41 - And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

Jesus promised His followers that they would be persecuted. Matthew 24:9 - Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Christians are persecuted. These TV preachers that come on and tell you that if you just develop your faith, God will bless you with a bulging bank account, a private jet and a house so big, there are some rooms you will never get around to going into, they are selling you a God that will give them a bulging bank account, a private jet and a house so big there are rooms they will never get around to going into.

The way I read it, if you are really serving Jesus and proclaiming His gospel the way He wants it done, you are going to get it. You will fall under tremendous hardships. Here in America, we consider it a hardship if we have to cut back on our cable subscription. Most of us don’t know what persecution is.

In the last couple of years, I’ve seen corporations become the subjects of boycotts because the people that run these companies express Christian values. There have been cake decorators and florists and whatnot lose their businesses over their Christian beliefs. For them to be targeted the way they were, they must have been doing something right.

Meanwhile, those worshiping God and spreading the Gospel in the Near East are beaten for their faith; those in the Middle East are stoned, and those in China are both beaten and thrown in prison.

Me? I started asking God what I did wrong when my car broke down. My wife and I were worship leaders at a church some years ago. We quit going to church altogether and spent years mad at God because we didn’t like the way we were treated by the church board. I really don’t think I’m where I need to be spiritually. I want to serve God, but I don’t want to get beaten up. I don’t think that’s any different than how anybody else feels. Except for those who are getting beaten up. It doesn’t seem to phase them. Those people have the kind of faith that I need. I think. It’s hard to wrap my brain around the idea of being so willing to be beaten, tortured and even killed; even though I want to claim that I serve God.

and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ

While in tribulation, you are also in the kingdom. Patience might better be written as “endurance”. It seems to me the tribulation would be what you experience physically; the kingdom would be what is experienced spiritually, and the endurance to suffer persecution is a product of experiencing the kingdom spiritually, and focusing on the kingdom, here on earth. All would be the result of serving Jesus Christ.

was in the isle that is called Patmos,

Patmos is a very small island in the Aegean Sea. Only thirty miles in circumference. The northernmost island in the Dodecanese group, it is about 20 miles from the shores of Turkey (what was considered Asia at the time of John’s writing), though it belongs to Greece. As Mediterranean islands go, it’s not that pretty. But it has the most incredible natural harbor, and so, was a major stopping point for ships coming from Rome.

for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

John makes it sound like he was on a missionary trip. He was obviously determined not to let any part of this book be about him.

There doesn’t seem to be any disagreement among respected scholars that John was NOT on a missionary trip. He had in fact been exiled to the island by the Roman emperor, Domitian, who was aggravated by John’s incessant spreading of the Word of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ. Being the last living Apostle, John would have been a very big draw wherever he went. This would have attracted the attention of the emperor. Domitian no doubt figured if he could just get rid of the last apostle, this whole rising religion would just dwindle away.

The problem was, he could not get rid of John. There is even a legend that Domitian had John boiled in oil, but that John wasn’t harmed by the oil, and that is when Domitian exiled him to Patmos. Nobody seems to actually believe this story, but they all love to tell it.

Personally, I want to believe it. I want to believe that God can keep you from being harmed, no matter what they do to you. Like I said before, I want to serve God. But I don’t want to get hurt.

Thanks to the Blue Letter Bible for allowing me to cut and paste all the scriptures I use right from their website. The last thing I want to do is commit a typo on the Word of God.

Revelation 1:8, An Expositional Commentary

I am

On the one hand, you can’t have a sentence without a subject (I am, He is, they are, etc.). On the other hand, every time you see “I am” in the Bible, you think of God. It is how He introduced Himself to Moses: Exodus 3:14 - And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. Jesus set off the Jewish leaders to the point of trying to stone Him when He said, “...Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58).

I find it interesting that Jews will not pronounce the name of God for fear it will offend Him. Yet here, God is telling Moses to use His name when Moses was to talk to the King of Egypt.

Alpha and Omega,

Alpha (A) is the first letter in the Greek alphabet. Omega (𝞨) is the last

letter in the Greek alphabet. That may seem obvious to you...and it is. I’m just jazzed that I could find this little beauty (𝞨) in my character map. So thrilled in fact, that I won't even complain about the English translators leaving the Greek in here. I've often wondered why it doesn't say “A” to “Z”.

the beginning and the ending,

Well, that’s redundant. It turns out, this particular little phrase isn’t in the most ancient manuscripts. I don't really see that as a theological problem. It just seems to me that if the English translators had actually translated the Greek in the first place (you know, wrote it as A to Z - I'm not complaining. Just saying), they wouldn't have had to add this phrase here to clarify.

saith the Lord,

              I was a little confused about this verse. I couldn't quite understand why it was stuck in here. This chapter seems to read just fine without it, and I thought this verse actually interrupted the flow of the chapter a little but.

               Then, I dug into it a little bit. While the subject matter right up to this verse is obviously Jesus Christ, the structure of the sentence seems to make this verse a reference to God (the Father). In fact, the rest of this verse seems to drive that home.

                  Now I'm even more confused.

which is, and which was, and which is to come,

  Sound familiar? Just four verses ago, this was used to describe God. Then, there was the seven Spirits, and then there was Jesus Christ.

         So this person speaking here (pay no attention to those red letters in your Bible) is God.

I'm trying real hard to keep God and Jesus separate. Having read through this book already, I know that it is going to get harder and harder as we go along.

The Almighty.

                   Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines “The Almighty” (pantokratōr) as:

(1) he who holds sway over all things
(2) the ruler of all.

“Almighty” works fine. This is the final piece of evidence that this verse is referring to God (the Father), which on the one hand makes this verse seem out of place. On the other hand, John may be working on a larger point here about the nature of God.

I want to stop here and talk a little about Arius of Alexandria.

Arius was a priest in Alexandria who believed that Jesus was not eternal. That He was created by God before the universe was created, which gives Him very high status, but not quite the same status as God the Father. According to Arianism (the term used for the teaching of Arius) believing that Jesus Christ is God would mean that you believe in two Gods.

This guy fascinates me because it was his influence and popularity that caused Constantine to hold an ecumenical council in Nicaea in 325 AD. This council is widely considered to be the birth of the Roman Catholic Church. By the time the council had finished, they had worked out a creed (the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed) that all the bishops in attendance were expected to sign. Out of a hundred bishops, only two refused to sign...and they were sent into exile. This creed is considered to be authoritative by the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and all the major Protestant churches.

According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, what follows is the English translation:

“I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.
I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.”

            

Most people who were raised in the church will nod in agreement with this creed as they read it. Those that have left the church will at least nod in recognition. Don’t worry about the part that says: “I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church”. The word “catholic” here is not capitalized and does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church. Catholic is a Greek term that means “universal doctrine”. This creed is the universal doctrine. So basically, if you believe this creed, it means you believe in the catholic church...not Catholic, but catholic. Clear?

The major issue the Arians have with this is the assertion that Jesus Christ was born of the Father - not created, and that He is “consubstantial” (meaning of the same substance or essence. All indications are that they invented this term just for the purpose of describing the Trinity) with the Father. Those indoctrinated in the church are instantly aghast at the suggestion that Jesus isn’t really God. But Arius put up a good enough argument to convince a multitude of people in his time, and there are large groups that still believe it today.

People raised in the church tend to believe the tenets of the church’s teaching  without question, as though questioning the teaching of the church is somehow blasphemy. I personally believe that it is very important to question those teachings. If you don’t question it; if you don’t read and research and meditate, then you don’t really understand what you claim to believe. That, to me (and Stevie Wonder), is the very definition of superstition.  

By the time I finish with this book, I expect to have a pretty full understanding of who (and what) Jesus Christ really is. The book is called Revelation after all.

Just a reminder: All the scriptures I used were cut and pasted from the Blue Letter Bible.

Revelation 1:7, An Expositional Commentary

Behold

   I love that word. If Amen was the perfect word to end the last installment, behold is an awesome way to begin any piece.

Behold! Look! Check it out! Fix your attention here. It’s probably terrible, but I see a circus ringmaster whenever I hear this word.

he cometh

Literally, He is coming - present tense. He is on His way now. It’s as though John is saying: If you look, you can see Him approaching. John probably could. John saw a lot of things in this book that I can’t see. That’s why he’s writing this book. If I could see it, I’d be writing the book.

with clouds;

When Jesus left, He went into a cloud (Acts 1:9 - And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.), and His disciples were told at the time that He would come back the same way: Acts 1:11 - ...Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

God and clouds go together a lot: Exodus 13:21 - And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night.

Leviticus 16:2 - And the LORD said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he come not at all times into the holy place within the vail before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat.

Isaiah 19:1 - ... Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.

Daniel 7:13 - I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

There are a lot more examples. After they consecrated the Tabernacle, and again after they consecrated the Temple, God would manifest Himself as a cloud and cover the Tabernacle/Temple in what Biblical scholars refer to as the Shechinah (or Shekinah) glory, meaning the abiding presence of God. Exodus 33:9 - And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the LORD talked with Moses.

Jesus Himself said He was coming in the clouds: Matthew 24:30 - And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Here, Jesus refers to the “clouds of Heaven”. That little phrase, combined with the descriptions of the Shekinah glory in the Old Testament, lead me to believe that these aren’t your ordinary cumulus type clouds. I don’t know what they are, but I’m sure it will be a spectacular sight.

and every eye shall see him,

Another thought to refer to whenever someone tries to convince you that Jesus has somehow sneaked back down to earth. For all the speculation that goes on all over the place, when Jesus returns - believe me, you’ll know it.

When Jesus comes, He will arrive in Israel. People wonder all the time: if He is in Israel, how will the “eyes” in Nebraska see Him? The simple answer usually given has to do with CNN and/or the internet. I disagree. There are actually people, believe it or not, who have other things to do besides surf the internet or sit in front of their TV. The return of Jesus Christ will be a supernatural event. I don’t see why we have to rely on natural devices to witness the supernatural.

When the Bible says every eye, I tend to take it very literally. I believe even those who are blind will see His return. Yet another reason not to take anybody else’s word for it. Jesus will NOT return quietly.

and they also which pierced him

This is generally understood as “even those who pierced Him”. So who pierced Him? If you want to get downright technical about it, the Romans performed the actual crucifixion. Roman soldiers drove the nails through His hands and feet. One Roman soldier even stabbed Him with a spear. I looked through six translations - every one of them say the soldier pierced Him.

I bring this up because it gets brought up a lot by those wanting to make the Roman Catholic church the Antichrist. The Romans nailed Jesus to the cross. I’ll send a free ebook to anyone who can guess where the Roman Catholic church is headquartered. So, you don’t have to twist logic too far, at this point, to arrive at the opinion that the Roman Catholic church is responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

If you follow that logic when you get to this verse, then it basically says: “Even the Catholics will see Him.” If you’re a Catholic, you can be offended at the logic or take encouragement in this scripture. However you want to do it.

I believe this is referring to Jews. While the Romans did the actual deed, they did it at the urging of the the Jews, who even went so far as to lay claim to the responsibility in what always struck me as one of the most unfortunate scriptures in the Bible: Matthew 27:25 - Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

Anyone who thinks about it understands that the Jewish leaders, who were concerned about their political standing, worked hard to get all of the rest of the people - most of whom didn’t know Jesus from Adam (there’s a pun in there; I know there is) - worked up against Jesus. There’s a political rant that I would love to go into right here, but I shall resist.

But the best evidence I have, comes from Zechariah 12:10 - And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

I saved this one for last because it opens another can of worms. This establishes fairly definitively that “they which pierced Him” refers to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. But what about “ME”?

“they shall look upon “ME” whom they have pierced,”...? This is the word of the LORD. “LORD”, when it’s done like this, is the proper name for GOD. Technically, it’s unpronounceable, and Jews won’t even try, for fear of offending God. Here in the West, we have no problem offending God, so it’s usually translated as “Jehovah”.

But my point is, this is the LORD GOD of the Old Testament telling the Jews that it is Him that they have pierced. This would seemingly equate Jesus Christ with the LORD of the Old Testament. In the debate between the Trinitarians and the believers in the teaching of Arius (in case you haven’t been following along, Arius taught that Jesus is a created being - that He didn’t really exist before He was born in Bethlehem, and therefore he is not really God), we can score this one for the Trinitarians.

and all kindreds of the earth

“kindreds “ would be more properly translated as “tribes”. Even the New King James says “tribes”, and in fact, Revelation is the only place in the Bible where the Greek word used here (phulē) is not translated as “tribe”.

This makes a difference because the Israeli nation is often referred to as the twelve tribes of Israel. (Joshua 3:12 - Now therefore take you twelve men out of the tribes of Israel, out of every tribe a man. Jesus even did it: Luke 22:30 - That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.) If you add to this the Greek  word “gē”, which is as easily translated “land” or even “country” as it is “earth”, it could easily say here “all the tribes of the land”. This would make the event a more local phenomenon. It doesn’t necessarily mean that, but usually, as we will see later, when the writer intended to mean

Worldwide, he would use a group of four. For instance, “every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” in Revelation 5:9.

I’ve heard very strong arguments against this interpretation, so don’t decide that is what you are going to believe just because I brought it up. But store it away. It is worthy of further research.

shall wail because of him.

We can fit the second half of that Zechariah verse in here: and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

What is translated as “mourn” here (mispêd), is translated in Strong’s concordance as “wailing”, “mourning” or “lamentations”. The word “wail” (koptō), here in Revelation 1:7 is defined by Strong as “chop”, or to beat the breast in grief.  So we get it. They will be very unhappy. They’ll be mad because they will realize that their Messiah was STOLEN from them because they didn’t recognize Him when He was here. He was stolen by those who called themselves “Christians”; who slaughtered and persecuted Jews for hundreds of years in the name of Christ. I’m not surprised Jewish people aren’t willing to stand around and listen to preaching and testimonies about how Jesus loves them. To a Jew today, the name of Jesus represents something besides love.

But I’m suddenly wondering about the change in pronouns. Go back and read Zechariah 12:10 again. “They pierced Me” -but- “they will mourn Him.” Reading through various commentaries, I seem to be the only one that even noticed. It’s little things like this that drive me crazy.

Even so,

A very emphatic “yes”. Not just yes, but… (you get the idea.)

Amen.

Once again, the perfect word to end on.

Note: All the scriptures that I use, I cut and pasted from the Blue Letter Bible.