Christians Represent the Daughter of Zion

christian1724 said:

Thanks for your response. I try not to come off as defensive and I admire all who seek Truth. If I were on the wrong path I would want to be corrected, the same with any Truth. I hope for all of us to be right in our understanding of the Truth. In order for that to happen, someone will often be wrong.

Click to expand...

Wisely put. I agree. May the Lord help us get over our proud ways! Again, my disagreements with you in no way is meant to impugn your character. On the contrary, you already appear to have good character.

christian1724 said:

I could reply that synonyms are ambiguity, especially if meant to convey the same concept. As a prime example I can refer to the riddle set to the "house of Israel" in Ezekiel 17.

The house of Judah remaining in Jerusalem is clearly the subject of the chapter and is referred to as a cedar , the highest branches being the line of David. In verse 22, God Himself crops off from it's top twigs a tender one to replant on the mountain of Israel

​

What does it mean that He would plant these Jews who are Israel in the mountain height of Israel (seeing as they are Israel according to synonymous wording)?

​

I can see where my propositions might be described as kabbalistic in nature. But some might counter that it's not secretive code talk, it's just that not everyone can understand ('strait is the gate and narrow the way'). If Truth were easy we wouldn't have any differences. People can be immersed in Truth and not realize it, sort of like not being able to see the forest for the trees.

Click to expand...

These things have to be put precisely. I have spent many years in Pentecostalism, where it is common for people to want to feel that they are interpreting *by revelation.* And so, they fasten all kinds of special meanings to their interpretations, many of which I believe are bogus. I've done it myself!

If the context calls for the use of symbolism, such as describing the house of Judah as a cedar tree, then it is perfectly legitimate to interpret the passage symbolically. But if the passage does not require the use of symbolism, then to insert symbolic interpretations into a passage that does not explicitly require that is what I call a form of cabbalism.

christian1724 said:

I know some (maybe many) people believe that. I have to wonder if some believe that in order that God might be delivered from having His Word be found unreliable otherwise. I'm not saying that is you. I think that His Word is unceasingly reliable though it often is difficult to see and sometimes comes across as a riddle.
I think Israel (both houses) are well described as scattered among the nations.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you're advocating for Replacement Theology or not? Clearly, the Northern Kingdom of Israel fell into such intense idolatry, being separated from the temple worship, that they perished or merged in with the nations.

However, the Southern Kingdom of Judah went into captivity for only 70 years, and many of the people returned. There is no question that many in the Southern Kingdom came down from the Northern Kingdom and merged in with what came to be known as the "Jews." The Scriptures themselves indicate this.

The following was done by the remnant of Jews who returned to the land of Israel *after* the Babylonian Captivity. They did this for the people from *all* twelve tribes!

Ezra 6.17 For the dedication of this house of God they offered a hundred bulls, two hundred rams, four hundred male lambs and, as a sin offering for all Israel, twelve male goats, one for each of the tribes of Israel.

You should also consider the following passage, which indicated what took place when the two kingdoms divided from one another. Many from the Northern Kingdom determined to obey the Law of the Lord, to worship the one true God in Jerusalem. And so, they moved to the Southern Kingdom, to avoid the idolatry that came to be set up in the North and was probably already being practiced.

2 Chron 11.13 The priests and Levites from all their districts throughout Israel sided with him. 14 The Levites even abandoned their pasturelands and property and came to Judah and Jerusalem, because Jeroboam and his sons had rejected them as priests of the Lord 15 when he appointed his own priests for the high places and for the goat and calf idols he had made. 16 Those from every tribe of Israel who set their hearts on seeking the Lord, the God of Israel, followed the Levites to Jerusalem to offer sacrifices to the Lord, the God of their ancestors. 17 They strengthened the kingdom of Judah and supported Rehoboam son of Solomon three years, following the ways of David and Solomon during this time.

So no, I'm not rationalizing by twisting Scriptures. These *are* Scriptures!

christian1724 said:

Yes, but not everyone will identify symbolism where it is used.

Also, I wasn't referring to Judah being symbolically called a cedar. There are several uses of symbolism in these 3 verses. Rather, I was referring to *Jerusalem/house [of Judah]* and mountain height of *Israel* being taken as synonymous terms which would cause the verse to make little sense since it would cause you to interpret that Judah (supposedly synonymous with Israel) is going to be carried away and planted in Israel (supposedly synonymous with Judah). Let me show the verses again since I might not have been clear on which terms I was referring to.

highest branch - symbolic of the house of David
high cedar - symbolic of Jerusalem (residue of the house of Judah)
top of his young twigs - symbolic of royal family
tender one - symbolic of daughter(s) of the king (which is of the house of David)
high mountain - symbolic of prominent nation/peoples
Israel - synonymous with house of Israel (who the riddle is being "put forth" to. This particular usage is not synonymous with Judah.)
all fowl of every wing - symbolic of those from every kingdoms/nations/peoples
trees - symbolic of nations/peoples
field - symbolic of world
high tree - symbolic of house of Judah
low tree - symbolic of house of Israel
green tree - symbolic of house of Judah
dry tree -symbolic of house of Israel

If Jerusalem (remnant of house of Judah(verse 12) - the subject of the riddle) and Israel (the recipient of the riddle) are synonymously used here then God would be taking away a daughter of the royal family from 'Israel' to plant in 'Israel'.​

I also am not rationalizing what my heart wants it to say, it's message is self admittedly symbolic and parabolic. To restrict yourself to synonymous usage of terms will, by self restriction, make understanding this parable/riddle all but impossible to understand the purpose of.

Hope that clarifies what I meant.
The post is getting a little long so I will stop here for now.

Click to expand...

Eze 17.22 “‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will take a shoot from the very top of a cedar and plant it; I will break off a tender sprig from its topmost shoots and plant it on a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain heights of Israel I will plant it; it will produce branches and bear fruit and become a splendid cedar. Birds of every kind will nest in it; they will find shelter in the shade of its branches. 24 All the trees of the forest will know that I the Lord bring down the tall tree and make the low tree grow tall. I dry up the green tree and make the dry tree flourish.
“‘I the Lord have spoken, and I will do it.’”

To be honest, I was just looking superficially over this passage, but will now consider it more closely. The background to this passage had to do with Israel's refusal to submit to Babylon at a time when Babylon was carrying off Israel in defeat. Turning to Egypt for help would lead to disaster, since God was requiring Israel to submit to Babylon, their pagan captors.

But then we apparently get this Messianic prophecy in which God shows His ultimate intention is to restore Israel through a descendent of David, whose ancestors' reign had been in Jerusalem. In this case, Jerusalem and Israel are nearly synonymous, since Messiah represents the salvation of all Israel.

God will "break off a twig," that is place Messiah, as the source of national restoration "on a lofty mountain." Referencing the "high tree and the low tree" as Judah and Israel is not in the prophecy at all, it seems. That seems to be your private interpretation, and not Scripture.

The contrast, rather, has to do with what Nebuchadnezzar does to Israel compared to what God will do for Israel. All, both high and low, both leaders and people, will benefit from this national restoration, engineered through the Messiah.

christian1724 said:

No, God isn't replacing the Israelites with gentiles. The church is made up of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Isn't that what Jesus taught anyway? It also has converted gentiles within it.

Click to expand...

Some today seem to have arrived at the thought the Gentiles are the lost ten northern tribes of Israel. The non circumcised House of Jacob compared to the Jews of Judah who returned from Babylon. Not sure if any have really considered that thought to any full extent.

Gentiles were not really a description of the Greeks nor Romans, but groups of humans living under Greek and Roman authorities. Can it be proven in the NT there was such a distinction?

Some claim the lost tribes could be the Scythians. Most just lump all people together as Gentiles as not being "a Jew". But Greeks are not Jews. Romans are not Jews. Greeks are not Romans, and Romans are not Greeks. Romans and Greeks may also not be Gentiles either. Who were these actual people called Gentiles? They may have claimed Greek or Roman citizenship, but so did some Jews, like Paul did, in order to be transferred to Rome.

christian1724 said:

How do we know that the Truth seeking Christian is the daughter of Zion?

I was also hoping to show that Ephraim (the house of Israel) represents the daughter of Zion but it's getting to be a long post so I should cut it off here.​

Click to expand...

Daughter of ___ means daughter-city of ___. A fairly common saying, back in the day. It generally meant colonies sent out from ___.

But Heavenly Zion is Revelation 12's woman in labor. And it is her children against whom the dragon makes war after he loses the war in Heaven with Michael. So... the children of Zion are those of Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the Commandments of God, and have the Testimony of Jesus Christ.

This is last-days Ephriam:

Isaiah 28:1 Woe to the crown of pride, the hirelings of Ephraim, the flower that has fallen from the glory of the top of the fertile mountain, they that are drunken without wine. 2 Behold, the anger of the Lord is strong and severe, as descending hail where there is no shelter, violently descending; as a great body of water sweeping away the soil, he shall make rest for the land. 3 The crown of pride, the hirelings of Ephraim, shall be beaten down with the hands and with the feet. 4 And the fading flower of the glorious hope on the top of the high mountain shall be as the early fig; he that sees it, before he takes it into his hand, will desire to swallow it down. ... 14 Therefore hear ye the word of the Lord, ye afflicted men, and ye princes of this people that is in Jerusalem. 15 Because ye have said, We have made a Covenant with Hades, and agreements with Death; if the rushing storm should pass, it shall not come upon us: we have made falsehood our hope, and by falsehood shall we be protected: 16 Therefore thus saith the Lord, even the Lord, Behold, I lay for the foundations of Sion a costly stone, a choice, a corner-stone, a precious stone, for its foundations; and he that believes on Him shall by no means be ashamed. 17 And I will cause judgment to be for hope, and My compassion shall be for just measures, and ye that trust vainly in falsehood shall fall: for the storm shall by no means pass by you, 18 except it also take away your Covenant of Death, and your trust in Hades shall by no means stand: if the rushing storm should come upon you, ye shall be beaten down by it.

That's why Ephraim doesn't show up in the 144k list.

Revelation 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: [and there were] sealed an hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. 5 Of the tribe of Juda [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad [were] sealed twelve thousand. 6 Of the tribe of Aser [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nepthalim [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses [were] sealed twelve thousand.
7 Of the tribe of Simeon [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar [were] sealed twelve thousand. 8 Of the tribe of Zabulon [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin [were] sealed twelve thousand.

Dan's probably not there because he mostly had daughters... even back in the day. Some people want to make Dan the big idolater because they think he was the first... forgetting entirely the snake-worship that was carried with them out of Egypt. But Ephraim is pretty much called the idolater extraordinaire, "joined to idols, let him alone." So is Solomon, btw, with his wives and their gods in the temple, but there's Judah in the list...
This Covenant with Death shows up in Daniel as the "covenant with many." Death and Hades follows with him... the rider on the black horse... Revelation 2: "kill her children with Death"... in the Great Tribulation. That's when this Covenant made by Ephraim (who seems to be squatting in Jerusalem?) takes place.

christian1724 said:

No, God isn't replacing the Israelites with gentiles. The church is made up of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Isn't that what Jesus taught anyway? It also has converted gentiles within it.

*If that's really your view, then let that be your stand. Only you can say whether that is honestly your view. It Seems to me like an 'I can find Jesus is in any verse' default in order to show how easily we can maintain a contrary view. I always say that people who honestly seek the Truth do so honestly with themselves.
**"... is not in the prophecy at all, it seems" , "seems to be your private interpretation..." - cunningly put! It suggests that my understanding is offensive to God while simultaneously and subtly reserving the possibility of your being wrong! - 2Peter 1:18-21 (There's a world of difference between 'not in prophecy... private interpretation' and 'not in prophecy that I'm aware of'). Anyway, you might well expect that kind of response by one who has been "looking superficially" at scripture (as to your credit, you honestly admit that you had been doing with Ezekiel 17) rather than having considered it before reply. That's fine, I'm sure we've all been guilty of that.

Click to expand...

Well said.

John 16:1-3 These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor Me.

christian1724 said:

Yes, but not everyone will identify symbolism where it is used.

Also, I wasn't referring to Judah being symbolically called a cedar. There are several uses of symbolism in these 3 verses. Rather, I was referring to *Jerusalem/house [of Judah]* and mountain height of *Israel* being taken as synonymous terms which would cause the verse to make little sense since it would cause you to interpret that Judah (supposedly synonymous with Israel) is going to be carried away and planted in Israel (supposedly synonymous with Judah). Let me show the verses again since I might not have been clear on which terms I was referring to.

If Jerusalem (remnant of house of Judah(verse 12) - the subject of the riddle) and Israel (the recipient of the riddle) are synonymously used here then God would be taking away a daughter of the royal family from 'Israel' to plant in 'Israel'.​

Click to expand...

Jezekiel 17:1-15 And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2 Son of man, relate a tale, and speak a parable to the house of Israel: 3 and thou shalt say, Thus saith the Lord; A great eagle with large wings, spreading them out very far, with many claws, which has the design of entering into Libanus—and he took the choice branches of the cedar: 4 he cropped off the ends of the tender twigs, and brought them into the land of Chanaan; he laid them up in a walled city. 5 And he took of the seed of the land, and sowed it in a field planted by much water; he set it in a conspicuous place. 6 And it sprang up, and became a weak and little vine, so that the branches thereof appeared upon it, and its roots were under it: and it became a vine, and put forth shoots, and sent forth its tendrils.
7 And there was another great eagle, with great wings and many claws: and, behold, this vine bent itself round toward him, and her roots were turned towards him, and she sent forth her branches towards him, that he might water her together with the growth of her plantation. 8 She thrives in a fair field by much water, to produce shoots and bear fruit, that she might become a great vine.
9 Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord; Shall it prosper? shall not the roots of her tender stem and her fruit be blighted? yea, all her early shoots shall be dried up, and that not by a mighty arm, nor by many people, to tear her up from her roots. 10 And, behold, it thrives: shall it prosper? shall it not wither as soon as the east wind touches it? it shall be withered together with the growth of its shoots.
11 Moreover the word of the Lord came to me saying, 12 Son of man, say now to the provoking house, Know ye not what these things were? say to them, Whenever the king of Babylon shall come against Jerusalem, then he shall take her king and her princes, and shall take them home to Babylon. 13 And he shall take of the seed royal, and shall make a covenant with him, and shall bind him with an oath: and he shall take the princes of the land: 14 that it may become a weak kingdom, so as never to lift itself up, that he may keep his covenant, and establish it. 15 And if he shall revolt from him, to send his messengers into Egypt, that they may give him horses and much people; shall he prosper? shall he that acts as an adversary be preserved? and shall he that transgresses the covenant be preserved?LXX

Odd, right?

So's this:

Isaiah 23:13-18 Behold the land of the Chaldeans; this people was not, till the Assyrian founded it for them that dwell in the wilderness: they set up its towers, they raised up its palaces; and he brought it to ruin. 14 Howl, ye ships of Tarshish: for your strength is laid waste.KJV
15 And it shall come to pass in that day, that Tyre shall be left seventy years, as the time of a king, as the time of a man: and it shall come to pass after seventy years, that Tyre shall be as the song of a harlot. 16 Take a harp, go about, O city, thou harlot that hast been forgotten; play well on the harp, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered. 17 And it shall come to pass after the seventy years, that God will visit Tyre, and she shall be again restored to her primitive state, and she shall be a mart for all the kingdoms of the world on the face of the earth. 18 And her trade and her gain shall be holiness to the Lord: it shall not be gathered for them, but for those that dwell before the Lord, even all her trade, to eat and drink and be filled, and for a covenant and a memorial before the Lord.LXX

Isaiah 23:8 Who has devised this counsel against Tyre? Is she inferior? or has she no strength? her merchants were the glorious princes of the earth.
Revelation 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the Earth.

christian1724 said:

I'll have to admit that I'll need to study that Isaiah reference to try and get an understanding of it's message.

I am with the understanding that Joseph in the list of 144,000 is Ephraim. You don't think that to be the case?

Thanks for you response!

Click to expand...

You're welcome. Thank you for this thread!

I don't think Ephraim is Joseph... Manasseh is also there... I know, first-son replaced... so, I guess I'm undecided... but, that covenant with many... our leaders don't often represent us, though, do they. I believe that Matthew 21 shows the Kingdom of God being given to the ten northern tribes who were producing the fruits of the Kingdom by going to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel. When the Kingdom is joined together, all 144k will be sealed... starting with Judah who sees first-hand the two witnesses taken to Heaven.

Revelation 14:1-5 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with Him an hundred forty [and] four thousand, having His Father's name written in their foreheads. 2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, [being] the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

Without guile: like Nathanael, an Israelite indeed! They're not celebates... they're just not defiled with Proverbs' strange women: other religions. They're the church of Philadelphia:

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from My God: and My new name.

christian1724 said:

No, God isn't replacing the Israelites with gentiles. The church is made up of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Isn't that what Jesus taught anyway? It also has converted gentiles within it.

Click to expand...

In my view, which seems to be unique these days, the Church is made up of Christian nations, and not just ethnic groups within nations. The Church includes both nations and smaller Christian groups.

Today, the nation of Israel is excluded, because it is not Christian. But there is a Christian remnant within the State of Israel that is included in the Church.

Most of the Church, therefore, is not Jewish, even though the Church began with the nation of Israel and devolved into a small group within Israel. National identity and ethnic identity are no longer pertinent within the New Covenant system of Christ, even though under the Law God's covenant was exclusively with the Jews.

Obviously, the distinction among nations and ethnicities is still pertinent. It's just that there is no longer any *qualifying factor* for becoming a member of the New Testament covenant.

Gen 17. I have made you a father of many nations. 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you.

Abraham was promised not just *individuals,* but *states.* "Kings" implies *states!* Abraham literally gave birth to children who produced the kingdom of Israel as well as kingdoms descended from his other children and grandchildren, such as Ishmael and Esau.

Clearly, the object is for God to have personal relationship with *individuals.* But it has been equally important to God to have *societies* that produce an environment with social justice.

christian1724 said:

Here is a verse worthy of closer consideration.

God makes this statement hundreds of years after the split of the kingdom after Solomon.
Clearly the northern kingdom of Israel (headed by Ephraim) is not perished and is not dissolved into the gentiles or the Jews.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, God said He would cause the Northern Kingdom of Israel to perish among the nations. Their only salvation was the migration of the Northern tribes to the Southern Kingdom of Judah, which resulted from those in the North who defected for religious reasons--legal worship before God had to take place in Jerusalem in the South.

christian1724 said:

Many could say that about the entire Bible, especially the Old Testament. Billions of people have read it but only a small fraction of them set about to study it. Wouldn't you agree? I mean, we all read it. Truth seekers usually return time and again to consider it more closely.

Click to expand...

That wasn't the point I was making. Perhaps you don't want to address that? I was explaining how scholars view the account.

christian1724 said:

*If that's really your view, then let that be your stand. Only you can say whether that is honestly your view. It Seems to me like an 'I can find Jesus is in any verse' default in order to show how easily we can maintain a contrary view. I always say that people who honestly seek the Truth do so honestly with themselves.
**"... is not in the prophecy at all, it seems" , "seems to be your private interpretation..." - cunningly put! It suggests that my understanding is offensive to God while simultaneously and subtly reserving the possibility of your being wrong! - 2Peter 1:18-21 (There's a world of difference between 'not in prophecy... private interpretation' and 'not in prophecy that I'm aware of'). Anyway, you might well expect that kind of response by one who has been "looking superficially" at scripture (as to your credit, you honestly admit that you had been doing with Ezekiel 17) rather than having considered it before reply. That's fine, I'm sure we've all been guilty of that.

Click to expand...

None of this has to do with "guilt." That's turning a discussion into a "blame game." Nor am I apologizing for viewing a passage "superficially." My initial thoughts did not find what you claimed was in the passage, and I was simply questioning the basis of your claims. None of this has a thing to do with "guilt!"

But yes, unless you want to be guilty of "private interpretation," you need to provide a basis for your belief that Israel and Judah are being distinguished in the symbolism. I just don't find that to be the case, and thus not strong enough to impose that interpretation upon the passage. I will sleep well. I hope you do too!

christian1724 said:

Jesus is our King and Savior and He arrived lowly and meek, riding upon a colt the foal of an ass into Jerusalem shortly before His crucifixion. I think I can say that we both believe that. Jesus referred to those who observe/acknowledge that as the "daughter of Zion". I'm pretty sure that we both believe that.

I proposed that by this concept the true Christian represents the "daughter of Zion" and also demonstrated through biblical scripture, including the words of Jesus Himself, that the Jews of that time are not the "daughter of Zion" spoken of in Zechariah 9:9, but are instead the "daughter of Jerusalem". I think that is where we part beliefs. You do not believe that I objectively show these to be the case.

Fair enough. Our other debates (Ephraim, etc), while interesting and somewhat connected may better fit the subject of possible future discussions/threads (that's on me). In fact I had planned on offering a few other proposals (possibly contentious/uncomfortable) in the original posting. It's just as well that I withheld those for the time being.

On a different note, I once longed to establish a life in the Pacific Northwest. I think it is the most beautiful part of America, especially Idaho. I understand that you live in that region. How fortunate in my opinion. I am currently pleased to live in Texas.

May God open our eyes and ears to the Truth.

Click to expand...

I spent a couple of months in San Antonio, and really liked it. I appreciate the more conservative status of Texas. I like its independent spirit, and rejection of "overreach" by the federal government, though big cities all over America, including in Texas, are becoming big Democrat bastions. Obviously, I don't like Big Govt!

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And with the rise of the Democrat Party, we inch ever more closely to socialism, to mind control, to dependency, to treating people like bricks in a wall. And so, Texas is a leader in the conservative movement that attempts to stem the tide. I envy your place there in Texas!

Here in the Pacific NW, we are dominated by the liberals in the Seattle/Tacoma area. Over on the east side of the State, they are farmers and Conservatives, but always lose out in the elections. My vote counts for nothing in this state.

However, WA is beautiful. The rain got to me growing up and I moved for a few years to S. CA. But I realized WA needs Christians more than CA, so I moved back. To deal with the water I became fascinated with ponds! When it rains I enjoy watching the earth ponds fill up!

Otherwise, the weather is moderate--not too hot, and not too cold, and less storms than most other places. Unless Mt. Rainier erupts we're okay, I think? The greatest danger here is sin, which does bring on the judgment of God, I believe.