I read your site daily and find it quite insightful as well as informative. May the Lord Bless you for all your hard work. OK, here’s my question: Regarding the Ark of the Covenant, I am trying to follow the ark from the time it was built until it disappeared. Because as you know many have looked for it through the ages. I believe the name was changed from “The Ark of Testimony” to the Ark of the Covenant early on in its history. I still have a lot of reading to do, but was the Ark in the second temple? and two; is it the same as the “Ark of His Covenant” as described in Revelation 11:19? If so then why would anyone be looking for it as it appears to be in Heaven with The Lord? Maybe he took it when the Glory of the Lord left the First temple. What are your thoughts.?

In my Sunday School class we are studying the Book of Revelation, using (a well known author’s book). Your studies have been especially helpful because of all the details you go into, and your wonderful insight.

There is a question in the book that asks us to read Daniel 2: 37-45 and to tell how that passage sheds light on the beast seen by John in Revelation 17.

I have read your study on Daniel entitled “The End Times According To Daniel … Part One, Chapters 2 and 7”, and your study on Revelation 17. Again, your studies are especially helpful because of all the details and your wonderful insight. However, that question has me somewhat stumped, and am having trouble connecting the dots.

What is your response to that question? Can you please help me connect the dots?

My question is regarding who are the Jews referred to in the Book of Revelation. I know from my study and yours that you must consider who is being addressed when reading prophecy in the Bible. Some prophecy is for the Church and some for the Jewish People.

The question is, who is considered a Jew when reading the prophecy about them. When the Northern Kingdom was separated, 10 tribes where in the Northern Kingdom and 2 in the Southern Kingdom. The Southern Kingdom was taken captive into Babylon and eventually returned and rebuilt Jerusalem before being spread about the earth. The Northern Kingdom was destroyed and essentially disappeared (hence the 10 lost tribes). When referred to in prophecy, who are the Jews? Those with pure blood only? What about those who may be 1/2, 1/4 etc? When the Bible states in Prophecy that God tells us that ALL Jews will return to their homeland, who are then considered the ones who will return? I know that even a small amount of Jewish blood can be detected by DNA tests. Do you think that DNA tests will eventually be used to find out, in some way, who is Jewish?

I just read, “Believe in the One He Has Sent” and I am in full agreement with what you said. My faith believes In Christ and his Word and it will be as he said, but still, you haven’t answered the question I asked when I wrote to you before (See: Punished Forever?).

“…why God appears to go out of his way to make Hell painful.”

God created hell and then he added something else – fire and brimstone. It isn’t just “outer darkness” where there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. It’s “physical” torture. He added that. Why? The analogy for me is separating the child by placing him in the corner because of disobedience. He is now no longer in the presence of the classroom. He is separated and can no longer wreak havoc with the others. But the teacher doesn’t think that’s enough. He sets the child on fire. Does that somehow make it more appropriate? I don’t get it.

I have 2 questions for you.

1. Where do you draw the line in case of what is acceptable and what is not when it comes down to women’s bathing swimsuit fashion. The most common reasoning is that 1 piece suit is less revealing, therefore better for a Christian woman. However, I just don’t understand where to draw the line here. The biggest difference between 1 piece and 2 piece in my mind is whether the stomach and sometimes the back is covered. I can’t see how that is a big deal since any swimsuit is extremely revealing by definition. Any thoughts on this?

2. Some preachers use a verse from the book of Leviticus to make a case against tattoos. I think the verse says that we were not supposed to make cuts on our skin. It very clear to me that Christians shouldn’t get tattoos because it a very pagan practice, but I don’t think its proper to use that particular verse to illustrate that point, simply because the verse prior to it speaks on restrictions for men not to cut their hair. If we were to take one verse literally, shouldn’t we take another one the same way?

I understand that my questions today aren’t as important in light of the soon coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, but I just want to know.

My question is about 2 Thess. 2:3. I talked with a Bible-teacher who expected a great revival of faith in our time throughout the world. I quoted this verse and in our language (Dutch) and in English there it is translated as a “falling away”. He said that the word translated wrongly there is ‘harpazo’ (it’s all Greek to me), which means and often is translated as ‘the rapture’. In a way it makes sense: “Let no one deceive you in any way, for that day will not come except the rapture (falling away)(harpazo?) comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed” (Amplified Bible). I don’t have a Bible in greek (yet), else I would have looked it up myself. Your comment, please.

I have a question about the generation not passing away until all things are fulfilled.

I assume this idea is coming from Luke 21:32. Does this idea appear anywhere else in scripture? Luke 21 is often compared with matt 24 and mark 13, but I believe there are some very important differences. Matt and Mark are private discussions with his disciples on the mount of olives. Luke 21 Jesus is teaching in the temple to the people (not just the disciples). It starts off very similar in verses 7-11 but in verse 12 it says “But before all these” Luke begins a discussion that describes the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the dispersion of the Jews into all nations and later what appears to be a description of the rapture. The abomination of desolation is absent from Luke’s account, but present in Matt 24 and Mark 13.

What time period is verse 32 referring to: The rapture generation or the generation that witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple?

At the bottom of an article I recently read (the author) mentioned that the Jewish Sabbatical Years were 2001, 2008, 2015, every 7 years.

“You shall sow your land for six years and gather in its yield, but on the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, so that the needy of your people may eat; and whatever they leave the beast of the field may eat.”? (Exodus 23:10-11)

Do you mind confirming whether or not 2008 and 2015 are Jewish Sabbatical Years? I’m thinking these two years could be prophetic. I’m hoping the Lord comes back this year. It would be so nice if the Lord literally raptured the church and fulfilled the Feast of Trumpets in the Fall. If Christians were Raptured this year that would leave 7 years to the next Sabbatical year. (2015) The year 2012 could literally fulfill the sixth seal in Revelation. All end time prophecies could very well be completed no later than 2037. What are your thoughts on this? Do you mind verifying if 2008 and 2015 are indeed Jewish Sabbatical years?

I received the following “explanation” of Isaiah’s reference to Messiah. How would you address that? Thank you.

“In chapter 9 Isaiah is talking about the future invasion of Assyrian king, Sanheriv, who will defeat the Northern kingdom (Israel/the 10 tribes) and will attempt to destroy the Southern kingdom (Judea) as well. Isaiah is addressing Achaz, the king of Judea, promising him that Sanheriv’s plans will not be realized, because the child who will become a king of Judea, during whose reign Sanheriv’s army will be destroyed, is already born.

Isaiah prophesies here that his name (not him) will be called (among others) a Mighty G-d, and in his days the Assyrian army will be destroyed as a result of a miracle just like the one that happened to Jews in their struggle with Midianites (see verses 3-5 in this chapter).”

Thanks so much for your web site, it has been a blessing. Once again, here is another thought about the timing of our Christ being crucified. I’ve read a lot of the articles, and they all make good sense, however I never seen in any of them a couple of scriptures that are very important.

Some suppose it was Good Friday, you say Thursday is the only day, while others say Wednesday. The gospel accounts all added together give us the clearest picture of all, setting aside Jewish traditions. Some say you must account for the traditions, I say the Holy Bible alone will give you the answers. Studying the Gospels, in conjunction with the old testament, when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday that He went into the temple for the first day of inspection. Therefore the three-day inspection ended on Tuesday.

The reasons I believe this are the two scriptures in Mark and Luke. The gospels say there was an earthquake when Jesus gave up His Spirit. The graves were open. The following day they could do no work. The day of the resurrection there was another earthquake. This leads to Friday.Luke 23:55 say the women followed to see where Jesus was laid, vs. 56 says “they returned, and prepared spices and ointments, and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.” Some believing this Sabbath to be Saturday correctly.

Mark 15:47 says the women beheld where He was laid. Mark 16:1 says, “And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint Him.

My question is how they could buy and prepared the spices before and after the sabbath, if the Sabbaths were not Thursday and Saturday? Was Jesus therefore crucified on Wednesday? Thank for your answer.